A Word About This Blog And Free Speech

This has come up due to the persistent responses posted to various topics in the past few days on my blog. I have always reserved the right to choose what I want to publish when comments are made. The only time I have deleted comments in the past have been because they were obscene, extremely rude or simply personal attacks.

Now I have a “reader” who has been actively posting on a few threads and said some things which I found to be patronizing and in line with the typical Muslim male patriarchal bullshit that I have had to deal with so much recently. I have no problem with his opinion but I did have a problem with his attitude so I have chosen to ask that person to not bother posting here anymore.

My blog is like my journal. I write what is going on in my life, what I think about and what is going on in the world around me. I almost always choose to publish my readers responses to my thoughts — whether I agree with them or not. But being published in my PERSONAL JOURNAL (aka blog) is not a right. I don’t force anyone to come to my blog and I won’t lose sleep if anyone decides not to read it anymore.

Anyone can have a blog. If you want to start a “PM is a Nazi” blog then you can. That will be YOUR personal space and you can write whatever you choose.

This one is mine — and I am not surrendering control of it.

I Can’t Understand Why She Would WANT To Stay In India…

Taslima Nesreen doesn’t fly under the radar for long and once again in the news and the crosshairs of Muslim leaders. This time, she has agreed to edit her latest book and remove “Muslim offending” passages (approximately two to three pages, pp. 49-51) in order to be allowed to stay in Kolkata (which has become her adopted home). The book Dwikhandito (Split in Two), like everything else Ms. Nasreen does, has offended some Muslims on the sub-continent. According to the London Timesonline:

Ms Nasreen had claimed that the religious references in Dwikhandito, which means Divided, are sourced from “universally accepted” books on Islamic history. Today she relented under pressure and said that “controversial lines” relating to Islam from the autobiographical novel would be removed.

“The book was written in 2002, based on my memories of Bangladesh in the 1980s, during which time secularism was removed from the Bangladesh constitution. I wrote the book in support of the people who defended secular values. I had no intention to hurt anybody’s sentiment,” she said today from a secret location.

“I have done what I have never done in my life. I have compromised even in a secular India.” She added that she hoped she would now be able to “live peacefully” in India.

Prashant Mukherjee, her publisher in Calcutta, refused to divulge the exact text or the nature of the sentences that were deemed particularly offensive by Islamic clerics, but said two paragraphs would be deleted. Mr Mukherjee said that the Muslim-born author, who was whisked to a safe house near Delhi by federal security officers, had instructed him not to reveal the content for fear of stoking communal tensions further.

“I can tell you that we thought it to be historical and true and that it would not give rise to any controversy,” he said. “It’s nothing extraordinarily poisonous against Islam but these people are hypersensitive.”

The publisher is not releasing any more copies of the unedited book, which has sold more than 30,000 copies in the original language since it was published in 2003. It has also been translated into Hindi.

Ms Nasreen was hounded out of Calcutta after widespread violence during a strike by a collection of minority groups demanding the cancellation of her visa. She had been living in the city since 2004 after returning from Europe. The Indian Government has pointed out that the author is a guest in the country, which is home to 140 million Muslims, and should behave like one. However, it has promised to host her at least until her visa expires in March.

In Her Own Words: The Woman from Qatif

Raped by Kathe Kollwitz (1907)

From ABC News:

In a December 2006 interview in Khobar, Saudi Arabia the woman gave a full account of her testimony to Human Rights Watch, describing the incident as she did before the court. She was meeting a male acquaintance, a former boyfriend, when the attack took place.

“I [was] 19 years old. I had a relationship with someone on the phone. We were both 16. I had never seen him before. I just knew his voice. He started to threaten me, and I got afraid. He threatened to tell my family about the relationship. Because of the threats and fear, I agreed to give him a photo of myself,” she recounted.

“A few months [later], I asked him for the photo back but he refused. I had gotten married to another man. He said, ‘I’ll give you the photo on the condition that you come out with me in my car.’ I told him we could meet at a souk [market[ near my neighborhood city plaza in Qatif.

"He started to drive me home. …We were 15 minutes from my house. I told him that I was afraid and that he should speed up. We were about to turn the corner to my house when they [another car] stopped right in front of our car. Two people got out of their car and stood on either side of our car. They man on my side had a knife. They tried to open our door. I told the individual with me not to open the door, but he did. He let them come in. I screamed.

“One of the men brought a knife to my throat. They told me not to speak. They pushed us to the back of the car and started driving. We drove a lot, but I didn’t see anything since my head was forced down.”

“They took us to an area … with lots of palm trees. No one was there. If you kill someone there, no one would know about it. They took out the man with me, and I stayed in the car. I was so afraid. They forced me out of the car. They pushed me really hard … took me to a dark place. Then two men came in. They said, ‘What are you going to do? Take off your abaya.’ They forced my clothes off. The first man with the knife raped me. I was destroyed. If I tried to escape, I don’t even know where I would go. I tried to force them off but I couldn’t. [Another] man … came in and did the same thing to me. I didn’t even feel anything after that.

“I spent two hours begging them to take me home. I told them that it was late and that my family would be asking about me. Then I saw a third man come into the room. There was a lot of violence. After the third man came in, a fourth came. He slapped me and tried to choke me.

“The fifth and sixth ones were the most abusive. After the seventh one, I couldn’t feel my body anymore. I didn’t know what to do. Then a very fat man came on top of me and I could no longer breathe.

“Then all seven came back and raped me again. Then they took me home. … When I got out of the car, I couldn’t even walk. I rang the doorbell and my mother opened the door. She said you look tired.’ I didn’t eat for one week after that, just water. I didn’t tell anyone. I went to the hospital the next day.

“The criminals started talking about it [the rape] in my neighborhood. They thought my husband would divorce me. They wanted to ruin my reputation. Slowly my husband started to know what had happened. Four months later, we started a case. My family heard about the case. My brother hit me and tried to kill me.”

Ya Allah! And on top of it all her idiotic brother wants to punish her more, no doubt for his “honor”.

I am sickened.

So Much I Want To Say

From Darat Al Funun in Amman, Jordan, Lebanese artist Mona Hatoum strikes a nerve:

So Much I Want to Say was recorded as a satellite transmission of a slowscan exchange between Vancouver and Vienna in 1983. A voice repeats the title line at regular and consistent speed, while the image on screen, of a woman’s face being gagged by a man’s hands, freezes still and then updates in a top-to-bottom sweep every eight seconds. The delay between sound and image reinforces the work’s strong sense of dislocation, of communication breaking down, failing to connect, or getting stuck in the throat, the words too numerous or overwhelming to ever be fully expressed.

And across the divide women are rising to the challenge to inspire justice in the case of the Saudi rape victim sentenced to lashing. In the Arab News Abeer Mishkhas writes:

The case of what has come to be called the Qatif girl is the talk of the media in Saudi and abroad; it is full of issues that we need to examine closely. To begin with, it raises questions about the country’s legal system, the fear of the power of the media and the secrecy that courts prefer to shroud cases in. There is also the social ruling against the girl, which is another important issue that has to be thoroughly looked into.

To put it bluntly, the picture that emerges is that justice is absent from so many court cases in our country. This girl’s case and the way it has gone shows us that the verdict was reached from day one. With no regard for evidence. The verdict was a given and that was that; any proceedings happening afterwards seem to have been only a formality. Otherwise, what possible explanation is there for the increased sentences after the first ruling? And how can we come to grips with the possibility that yet another increase in the sentence is just around the corner merely because she refuses to accept the second one?

The Minister of Justice has commented that people who have a problem with any ruling should appeal, instead of “stirring up agitation through the media that may not be objective and cannot grant anyone any right as much as it can negatively affect the other parties involved in the case.”

I beg to differ with the minister here, because as citizens in this country, we have the right to voice concerns about a case that could apply to any Saudi woman. Not everyone can go to the court and appeal. Add to this that these trials are not accessible to the public which makes it the role of the press to discuss the issues — and if the ministry finds the coverage “emotional” and “not objective,” then there is enough space in the same papers for official statements explaining the misunderstood implications of such rulings.

The ruling in this case, and the minister’s statement, obviously say much about the relationship between official bodies and the media. According to those bodies, the media people are ignorant of the facts, inciters of public anger, and naturally emotional. So the solution in this instance is that the media stop covering such cases, and let society enjoy its peaceful — and ignorant — sleep. Unreported or hidden facts do not hurt anyone or so they like to think.

The media, according to the judges, were also to blame. The girl was actually sentenced to extra lashes for going to the media with her story, and her lawyer got his share of blame and actual punishment for talking to newspapers about the case. The girl was also punished for something that is not actually a crime. She was out with a male friend in front of a shopping center so it was in a public space — not a secluded private one — and there were passers-by and shoppers all around. The mere implication that she brought this on herself by being out with a stranger only rubs salt into the wound. Basically, what those judges are saying to the girl is “You deserve what happened to you!” which is a very cruel and unjust way to think.

To say that for being in a public street with a man she deserved to be raped 14 times is simply beyond belief. But even if, for the sake of argument, we allow this comment to pass, how could it apply to other cases of rape in the Kingdom? We have simple questions to put to those judges: Were all the rape victims in other cases out with strange men? What about boys who are raped in similar circumstances? Boys do not have to stay at home nor do they need a chaperone. If they are raped, will those judges say to them “You deserved this”? And what about the girl’s companion in this case who was also raped?

To add to all of the above, we know that the girl’s husband has supported her throughout her ordeal and this says volumes about who has the right to be upset about her meeting another man. Does anybody care to respond to what I have asked? Maybe because I am from the media my comments will be taken as the “emotional stirring of agitation.”

You can contact the author at abeermishkhas@arabnews.com

Some Of You Are Willing To Silence Your Blogs For Your Husbands

What would you do if your GOVERNMENT tried to silence you? Would you give up your right to free speech and privacy then?

Well a friend of mine who got me started in this game is facing just such a threat and al hamdulillah he and his fellow Bahraini bloggers have the marbles to take on the challenge. Please support them by signing this petition.

What Is It About Islam That makes So Many Of Us Want to Micro-Manage Each Other’s Lives

I don’t get it. Do people think when someone converts to Islam that they automatically surrender their brain and their ability to think critically? Is there some formula for Muslim-speak in the blogging world I am missing here? It sounds an awful lot like Orwells’ 1984, only this time Big Brother is more like Big Sister. Let’s try supporting each other a little better — especially when it comes to the freedom to express ourselves.