« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »
February 28, 2006
Downsizing
Yes, we need to cut fuel subsidies, but here is the true price - much more than the extra 30sen per litre - we will have to pay:
Bank Negara Malaysia ... will probably now have to raise its benchmark overnight policy rate by 75 basis points to 4%, and not the 50-basis-point increase expected earlier, economists said." ... CPI growth is expected to perk up to 3.6%-4.0% in March, with a strong increase expected in the subgroup of transport and communication which makes up 21% of the CPI basket," said CIMB Investment Research in a note to clients. [Dow Jones Newswires via Yahoo! News]
Higher interest rates and costlier goods and services.
It's time to tighten our belts.
Posted by aisehman at 04:40 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Water Water Everywhere
Bernama, our national news agency, has a sense of humour that I deeply admire.
Take this headline, for instance:
Floods At Highways To Be Raised In Cabinet On Wednesday [Bernama]
I sure hope Pak Lah et al wear life jackets tomorrow.
But maybe Bernama was accurate after all, for the story includes this quote from Samy Vellu:
"It will provide a clear picture of the flood situation at the expressway to the cabinet members," he told reporters after a visit to the flood-prone areas of the NKVE, here Monday.
Yup, there's gonna be a flood in Putrajaya tomorrow alright ... a flood of excuses.
Posted by aisehman at 04:21 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
The Blogger A Kadir Jasin
Former New Straits Times group editor-in-chief Abdul Kadir Jasin has started a blog.
If you want the inside story, Kadir's worth a listen.
Welcome to the blogging community, Datuk.
Posted by aisehman at 09:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 27, 2006
Out For Three Days
So here we have it:
Screenshots, a popular blog by Jeff Ooi, is down due to suspected distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. [Malaysiakini]
You could say that for the next 72 hours, Jeff Ooi won't be able to incite religious hatred against anyone.
Or maybe Jeff should take it as having his publishing permit suspended for 72 hours.
That's a full three days longer than the New Straits Times has had to suffer when it incited religious hatred against itself.
Posted by aisehman at 07:12 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack
February 24, 2006
Thank You, NST
Apology accepted. Although I have problems with the explanation, but apology accepted.
Thank you, NST.
Posted by aisehman at 02:35 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
February 23, 2006
Twice The Error
The Old Man weighs in:
Bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad berkata editor New Straits Times patut digantung untuk "dua hingga tiga bulan" kerana menyiarkan sebanyak dua kali kartun yang berkaitan dengan kontroversi karikatur menghina Nabi Muhammad S.A.W."Walaupun akhbar itu tidak digantung, editornya patut digantung, kerana orang boleh melihat bahawa apabila beliau menyiarkannya, beliau tidak faham akan perasaan orang Islam," katanya kepada pemberita di sini.
... Dr Mahathir menyifatkan NST tidak sensitif dalam menyiarkan semula kartun itu.
"Mereka sungguh tidak sensitif dan mereka sepatutnya sensitif kerana mereka tahu cerita ini bukanlah sesuatu yang secara tiba-tiba timbul," katanya mengenai karikatur yang telah membangkitkan kemarahan dunia Islam selepas ia pertama kali disiarkan oleh sebuah akhbar Denmark dan beberapa akhbar Eropah kemudiannya.
"Jadi kenapa dia siarkannya? (kartun itu). Ia menunjukkan dia kurang faham dengan sentimen orang Islam. Dan mereka siarkannya sekali lagi semalam seolah-olah menyoal apa sangatlah benda ini, tak ada apa pun."
Bekas Perdana Menteri itu berkata: "Dengan bertanyakan orang ramai soalan itu, 'Lihat inilah yang kami siarkan, apa sangatlah salahnya?" sudah membuktikan bahawa dia tidak faham. Dan pada masa yang sama dia siarkan semula kartun itu."
... Dr Mahathir berkata dengan mengenakan sebarang tindakan terhadap akhbar itu, kerajaan akan membuktikan bahawa "ia tidak membezakan antara akhbar yang menyokongnya dan mereka yang berkecuali."
"Jika ia telah melakukan kesalahan, tindakan akan diambil dan tindakan itu haruslah konsisten," katanya merujuk kepada penggantungan akhbar Sarawak Tribune dan Guang Ming kerana menyiarkan semula karikatur Nabi Muhammad itu. [Bernama]
It's clear he's gunning for Brendan Pereira here. There are also political barbs thrown Pak Lah's way.
Anyway, for some reason, I can't seem to find the English version of the report on the Bernama website, if there is even one in the first place.
Any reason for that, Bernama? I can think of a few.
Posted by aisehman at 07:40 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Wrong Message
USMAN BAWANG says:
What kind of message are we sending the Government by continuing to harp on NST's mistakes (if it ever was).We all are getting confused about the reasons why we hated the NST in the first place. And now, judging by our response, we are all going to encourage the very culture of journalistic cowardice that we ourselves abhored.
We have the right to discuss this online. And to decide for ourselves IF the NST even had made a mistake. But please, this matter should be resolved, not in Putrajaya or anywhere else, but in the Letters to the Editor section in the NST and by exercising our daily right to pay RM1.20 in the morning.
It is shocking to see progressive and forward looking people, like bloggers, to continue calling for NST's head. We all are only tripping on our own shoe-laces.
We all should stand together to support the NST in this issue, and also call for the repeal of the PPPA and to restore Guang Ming, China Press and Sarawak Tribune to its previous condition.
What kind of signals are we sending to the Government huh?
Well said.
But other people should not be held responsible for whatever befalls NST due to the newspaper's own recalcitrance.
There was a way out, but the NST chose not to take it.
The newspaper still owes Muslims here a proper explanation and an apology.
Posted by aisehman at 09:58 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Hard To Say I'm Sorry
Show cause, NST told:
The newspaper today received a show-cause letter from the Internal Security Ministry over a Non Sequitur cartoon by Wiley Miller, which took a wry view of the controversy surrounding the Prophet Muhammad caricatures first published last year by a Danish newspaper.The NST has three days to give reasons in writing why action should not be taken against it for publishing the cartoon in the newspaper’s Life &Times section.
The ministry said the cartoon had breached the conditions of the newspaper’s publishing permit under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984.
It added that the sketch was inappropriate and could invite negative reactions in the country, especially among Muslims. [New Straits Times]
But still no apology.
I expect better and I expect more from the Muslims in NST.
If the editors of Jyllands-Posten saw it fit and were able to apologise for offending Muslims, then it cannot be that people who share the faith are unwilling to swallow the pride and suppress the ego to do the needful.
It would be unfortunate if it were so.
Posted by aisehman at 08:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 22, 2006
A Mockery
There is a diferrence, says NST:
What is the difference between the NST and Sarawak Tribune and Guang Ming Daily, which were both suspended?The difference is that they carried the caricatures — whether blurred or whether as pictured in someone reading a newspaper — which, in Islam, is offensive and wrong; and which is why the Muslim world took offence at the caricatures published first in Danish and European newspapers.
If this cartoon were to mock Islam and the Prophet, then, certainly, the newspaper that publishes it, in this case the New Straits Times, its executives responsible should be held accountable. Just as the editors and publishers of the Sarawak Tribune and Guang Ming were held accountable. [New Straits Times]
If I may be allowed to use the phrase again, the NST is missing the wood for the trees.
The reason why Muslims took serious offence to the Danish cartoons was not so much that they were caricatures of the Prophet, but that they mocked him and Islam in general.
I have blogged on this before but for those who are not aware, there is a frieze that includes the Prophet on a wall inside the US Supreme Court building.
It has been there since 1935, and I've yet to come across reports of large-scale protests against it, although there have been calls for it to be removed.
So if anyone in the NST would listen, let me lay it out for you: The cartoon you published need not have depicted the Prophet for it to be offensive to Islam.
Furthermore, the act of re-publishing the cartoon is a direct challenge to Muslim sensitivities, compounding what in the first instance was likely an oversight.
The NST is right. There is a difference between it, and Sarawak Tribune and Guang Ming Daily.
The Tribune and Guang Ming apologised for their mistakes. The NST hasn't, and remains unrepentant.
As far as the Muslim in me is concerned, what is unpardonable is that the top Muslim officials in the NST seem to have no qualms in remaining defiant.
Posted by aisehman at 12:40 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
February 21, 2006
Missing The Wood
This would be laughable it didn't come from someone as learned as Zaid Ibrahim:
Be it the nude squats controversy, the debate over Article 121(1A) of the Constitution, or the case of the 11 men in Kajang whose heads were shaved by police, the resulting public discourse often proves disheartening."Whenever there is a dispute or misunderstanding in our society involving so-called sensitive issues', we tend to miss the real issue.
"We end up being clouded by issues of race, religion and ethnicity, which have nothing to do with the dispute to begin with. It makes finding solutions very difficult," he says.
Zaid, the Member of Parliament for Kota Baru, cites the debate over Article 121(1A) as an example.
... "If we understand that this is an issue rooted in the Constitution instead of religion or the supremacy of one community over another, perhaps we’ll be less prejudiced and more able to find solutions," he says. [New Straits Times]
"Race, religion and ethnicity ... have nothing to do with the dispute to begin with"?
I don't have to remind Zaid that race, religion and ethnicity are at the root of them all.
We are a communalist nation.
That is how we have set up the country. That is how we run it.
The issues that Zaid speaks of are mere symptoms of this larger issue.
You would have to be either blind or in the denial to not be able see it.
Posted by aisehman at 09:59 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Cari Pasal?
Oh shit ... Jeff Ooi: How dare you English tabloid editors!
Does the cartoon make fun of Islam, does it make fun of Muslims, or both ... or not at all?
I'd like to hear what you think.
Posted by aisehman at 08:57 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
February 20, 2006
Small Man, Big Find
This is intriguing:
Alias [Kuwi], 32, [an Orang Asli], said that he and his friends have seen "hantu bojok", which resembles humans and is not hairy like Bigfoot."They're small in size, and we've seen them many times, we've seen them catch fish, but when they see us, they run," he said. [Bernama via mStar]
These "small people" must be really small to be described as such by the Orang Asli, who are generally short in stature.
Now take a look at this finding by Australian and Indonesian scientists in 2003:
Homo floresiensis ("Man of Flores") is a species in the genus Homo, remarkable for its small body, small brain, and survival until relatively recent times.It is thought to have been contemporaneous with modern humans (Homo sapiens) on the Indonesian island of Flores. One sub-fossil skeleton, dated at 18,000 years old, is largely complete.
It was discovered in deposits in Liang Bua Cave on Flores in 2003.
Parts of eight other individuals, all diminutive, have been recovered as well as similarly small stone tools from horizons ranging from 94,000 to 13,000 years ago.
The first of these fossils was unearthed in 2003; the publication date of the original description is October 2004; and confirmation of species status is expected to appear soon, following the March 2005 publication of details of the brain of Flores Man. [Wikipedia]
How small? Well, the near complete remains of what is believed to have been a 30-year-old female stands only about one metre tall.
Are there living Homo floresiensis in the jungles of Johor?
It would be worth finding out.
Posted by aisehman at 03:22 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
The Dead And The Living
Moorthy's mother visited his grave yesterday:
R. Saraswathi, 62, was accompanied by her daughter Tenmuli, 47, son Sanggarlingam, 26, and niece S. Meenambal, 20.They scattered flower petals and sprinkled rose water on the grave, and expressed relief on finally seeing the resting place of the Everest climber, almost two months after the burial.
"I feel sad, but there is nothing else to be done. Since he was a Muslim, then this is where he should be buried," said Saraswathi, adding that she only wished Moorthy had informed the family about his conversion.
"My other son is also a Muslim. Years ago, he told us about his wish to marry a Muslim girl and conversion. In fact, I was the one who made the wedding preparations.
"However, when Moorthy died, none of his family knew about his conversion." [New Straits Times]
For R. Saraswathi, it is time to move on.
For the rest of us, there are still issues that have yet to be laid to rest.
Posted by aisehman at 09:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 19, 2006
Vote Or Else
Are you crazy?
An academician on Saturday called on the Election Commission (EC) to introduce a compulsory voting system to ensure a higher voter turnout, especially among the younger set, and for voters in urban and rural areas to exercise their democratic rights.Dr Nelson Ilan Mersat, Head of Politics and Government Studies Programme in the Social Science Faculty of Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (Unimas), said the system practised in Australia proved to be a success. [Bernama]
You want the fickle youth, who are naturally anti-establishement and wont to rebel, to vote?
Posted by aisehman at 06:17 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Have We Been A Bad Boy?
What exactly is Rafidah saying here?
Wanita Umno chief Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz on Saturday advised women not to react easily to an issue which they do not understand to avoid confusion and misunderstanding."We need to get an accurate and correct understanding of an issue being discussed or matters being debated, if we don't understand, we will also be contributing to discussing the wrong things," the International Trade and Industry Minister said.
She said this when opening an information session on the Islamic Family Law organised by the movement in collaboration with the Information Ministry's Special Affairs Department.
Rafidah did not deny that at times there were misinterpretation of legal terms, which caused confusion.
"Sometimes, the sentence is not clear, the language is confusing and incoherent, sometimes [they] carry contradictory meaning and interpretation not because of malicious intention," [she said].
... Rafidah also urged the bureaus in Wanita Umno to hold information sessions at their respective divisions to clarify issues on the Islamic Family Law, which have become a hot topic among women as they felt the law discriminated women. [Bernama]
"Not because of malicious intent" ... but didn't someone say that "Taliban-minded bureaucrats" were in charge of Islam here?
So which is it: The men honestly didn't see the loopholes in the language of the law through which women would have been discriminated against, or the men willfully drafted the amendments in their favour?
And one more thing: Were any women involved in the drafting of the amendments?
Posted by aisehman at 05:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
No Fun Intended
Sounds like tough talk:
The Government will not tolerate offensive and inappropriate depictions of Jesus Christ and other religious icons, said Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.... "If anyone publishes anything inappropriate about Jesus Christ, we will also take tough action against him or her.
"We need to enforce tough measures to prevent such articles from creating social unrest," he said. [The Star]
He might as well have threatened action against anyone disparaging the beliefs of the Yaghan on Tierra Del Fuego.
The truth is you would be truly hard-pressed to find Muslims here (or anywhere else) willing to make fun of Jesus.
The Pope maybe, but definitely not Jesus.
Posted by aisehman at 12:14 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack
February 18, 2006
Pure And Proven
John Teo sings Effendi Norwawi's praises in his column in the NST.
It seems Mr Tiara Jacquelina is a Minister of "pure talent and proven technocratic skills."
My.
Someone remind me of our country's achievements when Effendi was in charge of agriculture and an "education envoy".
Posted by aisehman at 07:21 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Set Phasers To Stun
Here's an well-argued piece by former Court of Appeal judge Mahadev Shankar, who says that:
Article 121(1A) can only be left alone as long as it is clearly understood that a matter is only within the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court when all the elements involved, both as to the identity of the parties and the subject matter of the suit, are manifestly within the ambit of its powers and limitations.The law-givers who have been entrusted with the task of clarifying the law will do well to keep in the forefront of their minds Article 4 of the Constitution:
"This Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall to the extent of such inconsistency be void."
Authorititative identification and neutralisation of those laws enacted after Merdeka which are inconsistent with the Constitution are also a part of the process of clarification. [NST]
What the heck does "neutralisation" mean, Datuk?
Posted by aisehman at 06:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Last Respects
I bet the media will be waiting:
The mother of former army commando Sergeant M. Moorthy @ Mohamad Abdullah will visit his grave for the first time tomorrow.R. Saraswathy, 62, longs to bid a final farewell to her son after she missed his burial at the Taman Ibukota Muslim cemetery in Setapak on Dec 28.
Moorthy’s brother, Sangaralinggam, 25, said his mother felt now is the right time to visit his grave after the controversy over Moorthy’s conversion to Islam had died down.
"She hopes to come to terms with his passing with this visit," he said. [NST]
I think I'll make my way there, just to see what happens.
Posted by aisehman at 06:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 17, 2006
Too Big For Her Shoes
International Herald Tribune has an article on someone whom the writer describes as "Malaysia's big sister":
Sometimes it seems that Zainah Anwar - articulate, a little brassy, a presence wherever she goes - singlehandedly keeps the flame for women's rights alive in Malaysia, a country that sells itself as the model of a progressive Muslim society. [IHT]
No one can doubt Zainah's zeal for women's rights here. No one can doubt also that she regards the religious bureaucracy as her main opponent, for Zainah "calls the officials in the government religious departments 'those Taliban-minded bureaucrats'."
She was quite pissed with the recent amendments to the Islamic Family Law Act:
"Senators were told to vote against their conscience," [Zainah] Anwar said. "Can you imagine, in the debate, one minister apologized to her daughter for having to vote with the party whips. She was in tears."
In fact, she's pissed with several other things:
"A model progressive Muslim country cannot show the world that it ... allows its religious authorities to snatch away the body of a dead man from his grieving Hindu family," she said.
Big sister needs to lighten up.
I have no problems with her "mission", but Zainah needs to be consistent in her pursuit of Islamic justice.
Calling the religious authorities "Taliban-minded" will not only get you nowhere, it is unfair.
And this thing about senators being told to vote against their conscience; I would like to remind Zainah that the same senators have voted for other bills that they should have voted against, if they truly had a conscience.
Zainah's comments on the case of the late M. Moorthy suggest that she believes that even if he was truly Muslim, his family had the right to bury him according to Hindu rites.
But here is what takes the cake for me, as far as somebody who seeks justice is concerned:
She has not married, saying to people: "I don't want to be a slave to man."
No, not the part about being single, but the slavery bit.
Those words tell you a lot about Zainah Anwar.
They suggest that she sees marriage as not only pointless, but is inherently unfair to women.
On just about every issue, Zainah sounds like she's disappointed and embarrassed by some aspects of her own religion.
Is it any wonder that she has a credibility problem with many Muslims here?
Posted by aisehman at 05:42 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
February 16, 2006
Money For Nothing
The Malaysian Government paid sleazy Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff US$1.2 million to arrange a meeting between President George Bush and Dr M in 2002.
That's a lot of money, especially as it didn't do much good for the country, let alone Mahathir.
As the Los Angeles Times reports, "the meeting rehabilitated the Malaysian leader's reputation only temporarily."
And here - the ultimate irony:
On one occasion, Abramoff — an orthodox Jew and a supporter of Israel — was asked whether he was comfortable representing a country led by a man known for anti-Semitic comments.Abramoff responded, "They pay their bills on time."
The reverse could be asked of Mahathir, whether he was comfortable dealing with a man known for his support of Israel.
"He got me a meeting with Bush," would probably be his answer.
So why was a meeting with Bush so important for Mahathir?
Posted by aisehman at 08:10 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
February 14, 2006
Cabinet Reshuffle
These are the people who will lead us into the future?
No. These are the people who will have a say over who gets to eat what when the new national menu - the Ninth Malaysia Plan - is unveiled, sometime next month.
So what did you expect?
Did I hear you say more?
Oliver Twist wants more!?!
Posted by aisehman at 09:30 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
New Info
I'm sorry ... Zam is not about to get off the train.
Not just that, he's now moved up a class and got a better seat as Information Minister.
Posted by aisehman at 03:39 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Classified Information
Besides the politicians breathing down its neck, the media is also battling it out on another front; that is, industry competition between the various players for advertising ringgit.
The pie did not grow much last year:
Advertisers in the country spent RM4.56bil to buy media space and airtime last year, a marginal 3% rise from 2004.... Based on Nielsen Media Research (NMR) findings, newspaper advertising expenditure (adex) jumped 4% to RM2.78bil last year, while the other major advertising channel - television - only managed a 0.7% adex growth to RM1.31bil. [The Star]
Between the two (TV and papers), they account for about RM4.1 billion or 89.7% of market share.
That's a lot of money, but that's not what is interesting.
If you (yes, YOU) wanna piece of the action, this is it:
By product category, classified ads - on which RM599.5mil was spent last year - continued to be number one.
For those who are going "Huh?", one word: Craigslist.
Posted by aisehman at 10:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 12, 2006
Free For All
There is rising anger with the media among the power elite, says News Straits Times' Brendan Pereira:
[We] are being savaged daily by politicians, former politicians, social activists, self-appointed kingmakers and gadflies. For being too insensitive, too provocative or just too pesky.... In several meetings, Cabinet ministers have complained about the editorial approach of newspapers. They have assigned agendas and wondered why shortcomings of individuals and institutions are being exposed like never before. [NST]
Let me tell you the "outrage" is not uniform across the Cabinet.
Some are more upset with the Malay media, others with the Chinese newspapers.
The NST, in particular, is engendering simmering discontent in not a few UMNO heavyweights and politicans, although most refrain from expressing their displeasure openly, for obvious reasons.
One or two that are largely third-class passengers about to get off the gravy train, are becoming more vocal:
"There is a lot of evidence to show that they (certain media) are not being sensitive towards certain issues."This happens because there are journalists from the local media who, having served with the foreign media, embrace the Western style of freedom, and not freedom the Malaysian way," [Deputy Information Minister Datuk Zainudin Maidin] said. [Bernama]
Make no mistake, a battle royale is shaping up, as some on the other side are not about to back down:
... no one should go away believing that the Press or, for that matter, Malaysians, can be silenced by a government decree.If the Press is more questioning today, then it is because society is demanding more transparency.
If the Press is less willing to accept motherhood statements, then it is because the public has grown weary of the stock answer syndrome. [NST]
Fighting words.
I would feel a little more awed and be a little less cynical if the aversion to "motherhood statements" were not applied selectively.
Still, I have to say that I prefer today's newspapers any day over the fishwrap journalism we had to endure during Dr Mahathir's time.
Posted by aisehman at 06:05 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
February 10, 2006
Blast-phemy II
Well, I'll be a ... :
Denmark, where the Muhammad drawings were first published, has a law providing for fines and up to four months in jail for anyone who "publicly offends or insults a religion that is recognised in the country".However, a court case brought by 11 Muslim groups last October against the paper that printed the Danish cartoons was thrown out, with the judges considering that the issue of freedom of expression was more important than the ban on blasphemy.
Norway has a public-order law dating from the 1930s which outlaws blasphemy in principle on pain of up to six months in jail. However, it is never used.
Germany has an anti-blasphemy law dating from 1871, but it has been little used in recent decades.
It was, however, successfully used in 1994 to ban a musical comedy that ridiculed the Catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception by portraying crucified pigs.
Italy has a law against "outrage to a religion", which has recently been used against the journalist Oriana Fallaci for her outspoken statements and writings on Islam.
That case, which adds a charge of "incitation to inter-religious hatred", is still pending.
The Netherlands has a law proscribing what is called "scornful blasphemy", and providing for up three months in jail and a fine of $85.
The last major case brought under the law - in 1968 against a writer who wrote a poem about having sex with God - was thrown out of court.
Austrian law prohibits the ridiculing of a religion, on pain of up to six months in jail.
But, no attempt was made to use it last year when a book of cartoons was published depicting the Christian prophet Jesus as a marijuana-smoking hippie.
Poland, an overwhelmingly Catholic country, has a legal provision against publicly offending a person's religious feelings, with up to two years in prison.
An artist, Dorota Nieznalska, is being sued under the law for a sculpture in which male genitals were shown attached to a Christian crucifix. [AFP via News24.com]
So what sort of blasphemy is blasphemy in these countries?
Posted by aisehman at 09:31 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
Blast-phemy
We should have the right to insult religion?
[Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh] Rasmussen said Denmark already has laws on the books outlawing expressions that are racist or blasphemous.A group of 11 Muslim organizations used that law to file suit against the Jyllands-Posten newspaper after the cartoons were published in late September, but last month the prosecutor declined to go forward with the case, saying the cartoons did not violate laws on racism and blasphemy.
The Muslim groups have appealed to Denmark's top prosecutor. [Washington Post]
So what sort of blasphemy is illegal in Denmark?
Anyone conversant in Danish law?
Posted by aisehman at 09:24 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 09, 2006
Codeine
A code of conduct for the European media?:
The European Union may try to draw up a media code of conduct to avoid a repeat of the furore caused by the publication across Europe of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, an EU commissioner said on Thursday.In an interview with Britain's Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show "prudence" when covering religion.
"The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression," he told the newspaper. "We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right." [Reuters via The Star]
I don't think it will get far.
Posted by aisehman at 03:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Reap The Whirlwind
Read this in The New York Times: At Mecca Meeting, Cartoon Outrage Crystalized.
And this in The Globe and Mail: 'It is not what I want to happen'.
Posted by aisehman at 01:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 08, 2006
Look Before You Leap
It's arrogant and disingenuous to claim the high moral ground for insulting an entire religion just because you can.... "Just because a society has almost unlimited freedom of expression," cartoonist Garry Trudeau told the San Francisco Chronicle, "doesn't mean we should ever stop thinking about its consequences in the real world."
New York Times: Critic's Notebook:
They're callous and feeble cartoons, cooked up as a provocation by a conservative newspaper exploiting the general Muslim prohibition on images of the Prophet Muhammad to score cheap points about freedom of expression.... [There] is a deep, abiding fact about visual art, its totemic power: the power of representation.
This power transcends logic or aesthetics. Like words, it can cause genuine pain.
The cartoons, whose vulgarity and offensiveness are beyond question, were published as a calculated insult last September by a right-wing newspaper in a country where bigotry toward the minority Muslim population is a major, if frequently unacknowledged, problem.... The Danish government depends for support in Parliament on a far-right populist party with an anti-immigrant agenda: Maybe that's why Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen arrogantly refused to meet with ambassadors from Muslim countries last fall, when the controversy might have been defused.
... In reprinting the drawings the European papers demonstrated not their love of freedom but their insensitivity - or hostility - to the growing diversity of their own societies.
It is just such attitudes, more than any insult to Islam, that have inspired much of the Muslim resentment toward the West, and the growing anger of Muslims who live in Europe.
At least there are some in the West who understand the outrage felt by Muslims over the cartoons.
Some of us here need to give it a try.
Posted by aisehman at 11:42 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
February 06, 2006
Drawing The Line
Is the freedom of expression absolute? Or is there a line beyond which no one should venture?
Here's award-winning editorial cartoonist Kevin Kallaugher's take on the whole thing.
Posted by aisehman at 03:17 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Civic Duty
"In a pluralistic society, it is a civic responsibility to take great care when talking publicly about things sacred to millions of fellow citizens."
Read this Yahoo! News opinion piece.
Posted by aisehman at 12:06 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
February 04, 2006
Fundamentally Unsound
I just read through the comments on Jeff Ooi's blog on the cartoon uproar.
It would seem that some Malaysians don't see what the fuss is all about.
There are those who are of the opinion that only "fundamentalists" are upset.
That would be a mistaken belief, I assure you.
By all means, lets discuss religion in this country.
But should we also have the freedom to make fun of the faiths of others?
Who shall sketch the first caricature?
Posted by aisehman at 11:34 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack
Deliberate Provocation
Finally, a word from the Prime Minister.
Describing the publication of the caricatures of the Prophet as a "deplorable act", Pak Lah said it showed "a blatant disregard for Islamic sensitivities":
It is even more regrettable that newspapers and journals in some other countries such as Norway, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy and Spain had seen fit to reproduce the offending caricatures despite worldwide protests against the publication of those images.This is a deliberate act of provocation.
They should cease and desist from doing so.
He also called on Muslim Malaysians to "remain calm and rational":
Let the perpetrators of the insult see the gravity of their own mistakes which only they themselves can and should correct.
Fine words, but I don't think the perpetrators see it as a mistake.
Posted by aisehman at 10:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 03, 2006
Because I Can?
Here's Danish vice prime minister Bendt Bendtsen, who asks if it was appropriate to publish the cartoons:
"What Jyllands-Posten did is totally legal."I've got nothing against freedom of speech - it is important for us all - but if it can offend and hurt a lot of people, why use freedom of speech for that?
"This is about respecting other people's cultures," Bendtsen said. [Jyllands-Posten]
He compares the caricatures of the Prophet to Danish artist Jens Jørgen Thorsen's infamous work which depicted ... I won't write it down here. Read the story.
And if you want to find out more, just Google his name.
Thanks rajarome for the pointer.
Posted by aisehman at 11:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Limits And Boundaries
Read what The Guardian says about the cartoons.
Some excerpts:
There are limits and boundaries - of taste, law, convention, principle or judgment. All these constraints matter and cannot be automatically overriden by invoking the larger principle [of freedom of speech].... It is one thing to assert the right to publish an image of the prophet ... but it is another thing to put that right to the test, especially when to do so inevitably causes offence to many Muslims and, even more so, when there is currently such a powerful need to craft a more inclusive public culture which can embrace them and their faith. [The Guardian]
Excellent stuff.
Posted by aisehman at 03:57 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Cartoon Network III
Some noteworthy comments and observations:
"We [Muslims in Denmark] are against censorship. We believe in free speech. Many of us fled our countries because of the lack of free speech," insists Mr Ahmad Akkari, a social worker."But what we told the editor of Jyllands-Posten [the paper which first printed the cartoons last September] is that they had picked the wrong test case for this freedom.
"They've picked on one of the most marginalised communities in this country, one that has many social problems and who have been struggling against Islamophobia here." [The Guardian]
And another:
For Manu Saleem, a Copenhagen councillor, the cartoons have been seized upon by Muslim groups as concrete proof of the Islamophobia they experience in Denmark, he says.A Dane of Indian background and a non-Muslim, he recognises the importance of freedom of speech to Danes - "they believe it is a Danish invention" - but he also insists: "If you have free speech, you also have a responsibility towards the people you are speaking about."
The point is how do you "reconcile two conflicting principles - free speech and tolerance."
That's something to think about.
Posted by aisehman at 12:32 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 02, 2006
Cartoon Network II
European newspapers simply love cartoons:
The controversy over cartoons of prophet Mohammed being published in a Danish paper escalated yesterday when newspapers across Europe followed suit by re-printing some of the illustrations.News publications in France and Germany, followed by the Netherlands, Italy, Iceland, Norway, Denmark and Spain all carried some of the drawings, attracting condemnation from Muslim groups. [Asians in Media]
It seems we Muslims can't quite grasp the concept of democracy:
Reporters Without Borders said the reaction in the Arab world "betrays a lack of understanding" of press freedom as "an essential accomplishment of democracy."... In a leading editorial, [German paper Die Welt] argued there was a right to blaspheme in the West, and asked whether Islam was capable of coping with satire.
Last time I checked, politeness when dealing with the religious beliefs of others was still a virtue.
It's all too easy to make fun of things you don't believe in, especially when the people having all the fun are in the majority.
BTW Anyone heard a whimper yet from Pak Lah?
Posted by aisehman at 03:11 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics
After The Star put out a story on its frontpage warning of an impending petrol price hike, The New Straits Times saw it fit to do some damage control:
Despite the flurry of price increases last year, Malaysia remains one of the cheapest places in the world to live in.In the latest cost-of-living survey by the Economist Intelligence Unit, Kuala Lumpur was ranked 95th among 128 cities in the world, up three places from the year before.
The most expensive city in the world was Oslo in Norway, knocking Tokyo from the perch for the first time in 14 years. [New Straits Times]
And the story goes on to provide examples of the cost of certain products and services in Oslo.
What doesn't get mentioned in the story is that Norway has consistently been found to be the best country to live in over the last five years by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
So, this is the sort of story you would be right to describe as deliberately misleading.
This is the sort of story that insults the intelligence.
And because it is on the frontpage, this is the sort of story you can file under the category of Propaganda.
Posted by aisehman at 01:29 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 01, 2006
Hamas Money You Gave?
More on Hamas. It seems they couldn't care less whether the West wants to provide aid or not:
A senior Hamas official said Tuesday his group is already looking for new sources of funding after the international community threatened to cut off aid, saying Hamas - which won legislative elections in a landslide - won't be "blackmailed."... "We are looking for alternative sources and we will not allow ourselves to be blackmailed," Osama Hamdan, a member of the group's exiled leadership, said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press from Beirut, Lebanon. [Associated Press via The Wall Street Journal Online; subscription required]
So where does Hamas get its money?
Hamas won't disclose how much money it has. However, its leaders said the group suffers from no lack of funds because of contributions from Iran and Arab states such as Qatar and Kuwait.Hamas collects donations from charities and communities around the world, especially Indonesia, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia, where people give generously during collection drives after Friday prayers.
... Islamic charities, private donors, and the non-governmental organizations sympathetic to the Hamas agenda from around the world will continue to send money to the Palestinians.
Hamas has its fans in the Muslim world and has survived since it was created 19 years ago through donations that some believe have reached tens of millions of dollars a year.
Malaysia? Really? I can't recall giving money to Hamas.
Posted by aisehman at 02:26 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack