Journalist Arrested For Tweet Deported to Saudi Arabia 604
New submitter cosmicaug writes with an update to yesterday's report that journalist Hamza Kashgari had been arrested by Malaysian police acting on a request conveyed from the Saudi government via Interpol. Now, says the BBC, "Police confirmed to the BBC that Hamza Kashgari was sent back to Saudi Arabia on Sunday despite protests from human rights groups. Mr Kashgari's controversial tweet last week sparked more than 30,000 responses and several death threats. Insulting the prophet is considered blasphemous in Islam and is punishable by death in Saudi Arabia. Mr Kashgari, 23, fled Saudi Arabia last week and was detained upon his arrival in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur on Thursday." Writes cosmicaug: "Sadly, the most likely outcome is that they are going to execute this man for three tweets."
Stop buying oil from these dipshits (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure thing! (Score:4, Funny)
Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.
Green Energy (Score:4, Insightful)
Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.
What is trying to be done is to develop alternative or "green" energy. Unfortunately with the rancorous political dialog here in the US, it's being dragged down.
I firmly believe that the only way for us in the US to fully develop other energy sources is for government involvement. I agree, it's not the best solution but US business is too short sighted to pursue that avenue on its own - and part of their short shortsightedness is from Wall Street pressure - got to have immediate returns, after all.
In the meantime, all of the cutting edge alternative energy developments are being done in Europe and in China.
I find that quite damning of our political and business environment.
So, those Saudi assholes are going to keep doing their shit for a very long time - no thanks to us, the US.
Re:Green Energy (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's bankrupt ourselves like Spain on the green energy=jobs wild goose chase.
Yeah its not like the western world has already bankrupted itself with the "if we make a few people billionaires for wearing a suit and talking a lot, the rest will trickle down"
oh wait..
Re:Green Energy (Score:5, Insightful)
Well-regulated nuclear power is green energy, in my book.
Re:Green Energy (Score:4, Informative)
Then it's clear you don't understand modern nuclear power plant designs. There is far less danger from the radioactive waste coming from a modern nuclear power plant, then from any of the coal plants that have ever been built.
Re:Green Energy (Score:5, Informative)
Where are the coal versions of Fukushima and Chernobyle? Surely you can point to tens of examples easily as coal has been in use much longer and on a larger scale.
Why yes, one can -- of course, the exact examples you are looking for depend on what aspects of "Fukushima and Chernobyle" you are asking for coal-mining versions of.
Are you asking about examples of sudden, unexpected disasters causing mass death or destruction of nearby cities? Okay, here are some:
Ok Tedi disaster [wikipedia.org]
Buffalo Creek Flood [wikipedia.org]
Or perhaps you are asking about situations in which large numbers of industry workers were killed in an accident? Yep, we've got those [wikipedia.org] too... thousands of coal workers die from accidents every year.
Or maybe you're wondering about if there are entire regions whose ecosystem has been destroyed by coal? Yes, there are [google.com].
Or perhaps you are asking about the slow-motion health and environmental damage caused by coal even when everything is working as designed? Yup, there's that [wikipedia.org] as well.
Nuclear certainly has its problems, but coal is much, much, much worse.
Re:Green Energy (Score:5, Interesting)
Where are the coal versions of Fukushima and Chernobyle? Surely you can point to tens of examples easily as coal has been in use much longer and on a larger scale.
You mean like Centralia [wikipedia.org], Brennender Berg [wikipedia.org] (it's been burning for over three hundred years), or Kingston Steam Plant [wikipedia.org]?
Re: (Score:3)
+100, Take that!
Seriously though, good response. Nuclear isn't perfect (no energy source is and all come with risks), but it's the best option right now for baseline power load with zero greenhouse emissions. Supplement with wind and solar (in fact, even replace completely with wind and solar if the technology advances to the point at which it's practical to do so, but that time is not yet).
Re:Green Energy (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, it can't be by fracking or nuclear power. No, we have to rely on green energy.
Fracking pollutes the ground water, and stirs up and softens clay... certain types of clay, such as leda clay, are particularly vulnerable to these seismic disturbances, and can lead to landslides and sinkholes. I have yet to hear a story about how Fracking is good for the environment.
Nuclear energy, while it can be done safely if you're in the right part of the world, still leaves the chance for disaster. And I'm not just talking about Chernobyl, 3 Mile Island, or Fukushima-type disaster, I'm also talking about the dozens of other partial meltdowns that have happened. While on the whole, nuclear power does have a very good safety record, it also produces waste matter that has to be stored for decades before it can be recycled safely, and while I don't like pulling terrorism into a discussion like this, can you imagine the kind of fallout (literally) that could happen if somebody hijacked a shipment of untreated nuclear waste?
Nobody who's sane is saying that we should be stopping all fossil fuel use and go 100% solar/wind as of tomorrow, and damn the consequences. But I don't think it's unreasonable to try to shift our use to energy production methods that don't cause damage to the environment, and that will still be around for our grandchildren. It'll be a gradual shift, of course, but it's naive to think we can continue with our current patterns for another hundred years. Switching to renewable sources can be done, though: Iceland is already running 80% of their grid from renewable sources (mainly hydro and geothermal). And if you'd like a larger area/population to compare with, Quebec is mostly Hydro, too, with renewable energy sources outnumbering non-renewable generators by 60:1. Mostly, it's just a question of deciding which types of renewable energy are most appropriate for the area, and building that type of generator, but industry doesn't have the will for it yet.
Except, of course, countries like Spain and Denmark, where the government has taken an active role in the development of these technologies. There is no reason that the US demand for electricity can't be served by 100% renewable sources, if you're smart about where you put them, and what kinds you use.
Re:Sure thing! (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Replace coal fired electricity generation with nuclear power
2) Use the coal now not being burned to produce electricity, to instead produce synthetic liquid fuels (Fischer Tropsch process, etc)
3) Electricification of transportation (Electric commuter cars, electricified rail transport etc)
4) Nuclear powered merchant shipping (by this stage ecconomies of scale in step 1 should have driven down the cost of nuclear plant, fuel assembly and spent fuel reprocessing, etc).
5) Bring our soldiers home as foreign oil becomes increasingly irrelevant...
6) Reprocess the spent nuclear fuel, vitrify the fission products and bury them in a deep hole, and send the rest of the spent fuel (unfissioned uranium and transuranics like plutonium) back to a reactor for another fuel cycle.
7) Export advanced nuclear reactor technoloy to the rest of the world $$$
= Cleaner air in our cities, reduced CO2 emissions, eleminate dependance on foreign oil, stop pissing of other countries by sending our soldiers to their neighbourhood, etc
But no, instead of doing the above as an ecconomic stimulus, we (the western world) will spend billions/trillions on fighting wars in the mid east to secure our oil supply (money up in smoke?)
Re:Sure thing! (Score:4, Funny)
Just tell me where to buy the Mr. Fusion upgrade.
Mr. Fusion only powered the time circuits, the time machine still required unleaded gasoline to move and hit 88mph.
Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits (Score:5, Insightful)
And stop selling weapons to these dipshits. [nytimes.com]
Australian here, (Score:5, Interesting)
Now not buying oil from them wont make them stop acting like idiots, they'll just be poor idiots. Even that is unlikely as they aren't going to run out of customers for their oil any time soon. But yes, the US should pull support from the Saudi's for many more reasons then this, that means pulling US forces out of Saudi bases (even the logistic bases) and stop selling them weapons.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow. Just Wow. In 2012 you want to defend these camel molesting savages with political relativism.
It's probably a little too deep for you to grasp, but there are some ideas among the civilized world that are so fundamental we call them "human rights". Everyone who is human enjoys them no matter what they worship or which piece of earth they occupy.
Among those "human rights" is the right not to be beheaded when speaking your mind. Even you benefit from these rights - that's why you get to say stupid s
Re:Stop buying oil from these dipshits (Score:4, Insightful)
While I agree with you morally, we can't have a "civilized" society as we know it without the things we have from other countries at Walmart prices.
The GP is spot on. We have too many problems to sort out before we can even think about pushing our influence to "better the world." Right now, we have our own religious nut-bags trying to run the government here. As soon as we can get over our own God addiction, we can start preaching to the rest of the world to grow the hell up.
The world would be a better place if we could get over the multitudes of self-interested parties trying to protect their wealth while destroying the world. But if you want to preach, you had better start convincing the foot soldiers who make it all possible to stop serving "the bad guys." Problem with that is if you were to convince the US foot soldiers to stop supporting the bad guys, there will be some OTHER really bad guys who have some guys you can't reach to convince will come over here and start pushing their will all over us.
The fact is, we have some really bad people on all sides playing the same games. They ALL need to stop at once bcause the moment one ceases aggression, someone else will come along to take over.
It's one thing to boycott products which are not necessary. It's another to boycott the world's life blood. There's more riding on this than you can possibly imagine or want to consider. Anyway, I'm glad you aren't making decisions.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with the civilized world is that it depends on the dipshits for its freedoms (or at least the freedoms to travel, use plastics and fertilizers). So, the civilized world is treading a very careful path between standing up for its ideals and protecting those freedoms.
That is why you get paradoxical situations like the civilized world sponsoring a war against a regime in one country and supporting the regime in another, although both regimes are equally abhorrent.
A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
As far as I know, most western countries have a policy that states "If a man will be executed upon being sent to a country, you are not allowed to send this man to the country, nor are you allowed to deport him to a country that may deport him to the country in question", or something similar. Disregard the lack of Lawyer shargon, but instead: Why was this rule not followed?
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That only applies to countries that themselves don't have the death penalty. Malaysia does have the death penalty. Besides that, this is still probably even a crime in Malaysia, since they have Shariah law. I think he was only deported to Saudi Arabia for his trial because he is a citizen of Saudi Arabia.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
Because Malaysia is mostly Muslim and they think it's totally cool that Saudi Arabia wants to execute this guy over bashing "the prophet".
Note, when you are fleeing a country for religious reasons, don't flee to another country that is same religion as one you are fleeing from. Double if it's the same state religion. Pick a place that doesn't care like Netherlands or Belgium.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Police in Kuala Lumpur said Hamza Kashgari, 23, was detained at the airport "following a request made to us by Interpol" the international police cooperation agency, on behalf of the Saudi authorities.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
Holy shit. This is a flagrant abuse of Interpol. It should result in both Saudi Arabia and Malaysia being completely kicked out immediately, and ideally blocked from issuing any extradition requests or international warrants whatsoever.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
"Article 3. It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
It's only ever treated as "international territory" when it's a convenient fiction for the host nation. No nation that I'm aware of has a problem arresting people that it wants to arrest off planes that are just passing through. The US and other western nations certainly don't.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
The US no longer has transit visas (except IIRC for UN diplomats). Everyone on a plane that transits the US is forced to get off and go through customs and is there subject to interrogation and arrest.
Re: (Score:3)
similar to stopping a plane mid air forcing it to land
If you're in a country's airspace, you'd better believe they'll force that plane to land if they want you badly enough.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Pick a place that doesn't care like Netherlands or Belgium.
Maybe you meant this as a joke, but both the Netherlands and Belgium arrest people for insulting religious figures, expressing particularly unpopular opinions, and (for Belgium) going out in public wearing clothing associated with unpopular religions. If you want references, just google for either country plus "hate speech", "holocaust denial", or "veil ban". These are hardly countries that "don't care" about thought control.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
The question isn't whether the country has total freedom of speech and religion, it's whether the target country will deport this guy for this offense.
If a country doesn't like Islam too much, and bans people wearing Islamic veils in public, then it's quite likely that someone showing up there from an Islamic country, on the run because he insulted the Islamic religion, probably isn't going to be deported.
Re: (Score:3)
...he insulted the Islamic religion...
I read the tweets and I don't have a clue why they are considered an insult, much less to an imaginary entity. Can someone elaborate on that ?!?
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Tweet said: "I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don't understand about you. I will not pray for you"
The tweets were put out on Mohammed's birthday (a BIG holy day) and were assumed to reference the prophet. I'm guessing that both the hate and the not praying are considered no-nos.
He is reported to have apologized, which may have confirmed his guilt for those in Saudi Arabia looking to convict him of blasphemy/apostasy, which is a capital offense in Saudi Arabia.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh come on, stop assuming that Malaysians are OK with such a thing. That's flat-out false; Malaysia's interpretation of the Quran is very very different than Saudi's. Malaysia's version of Islamic law doesn't even punish adultery, while Saudi considers it a capital offense.
Malaysia is bound by an extradition treaty, do they even have any legal leeway to deny such a request? Unlike the US/UK, Malaysia probably doesn't have any laws forbidding deportation if they will be tortured/executed. To use a Florida ex
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Because Malaysia has the death penalty, outside of wartime treason, themselves (unlike most western countries, the USA being the only exception) so why wouldn't they extradite somewhere else that also does?
Of course Malaysia isn't a Western country no matter how hard you squint either.
On a side note, Saudi Arabia executed someone for witchcraft last year, so one can only assume the burden of proof isn't exactly high. Or they actually have real live witches casting spells of course...
Re: (Score:3)
On a side note, Saudi Arabia executed someone for witchcraft last year, so one can only assume the burden of proof isn't exactly high. Or they actually have real live witches casting spells of course...
Maybe it was a Harry Potter convention, in which case it was probably justified.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
Malaysia isn't a western country and probably doesn't have that rule.
Malaysia probably has just the opposite rule, considering The Malaysian constitution states that Islam is the state religion.
One has to wonder why this guy would flee to any Muslim Majority nation, let alone one with an official "state religion" of Islam.
Re: (Score:3)
That's the part I'm wondering. Either this guy was really dumb, didn't have much choice (maybe he couldn't get a visa to a better country for some odd reason), or maybe he was intercepted while his escape plan was still in motion (maybe he had to go to Malaysia first because they're so friendly with SA, and step 2 was to jump from there to someplace better, and he was caught before that point, faster than he thought he'd be).
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
That's the part I'm wondering. Either this guy was really dumb, didn't have much choice (maybe he couldn't get a visa to a better country for some odd reason), or maybe he was intercepted while his escape plan was still in motion (maybe he had to go to Malaysia first because they're so friendly with SA, and step 2 was to jump from there to someplace better, and he was caught before that point, faster than he thought he'd be).
According to Wikipedia, he was heading to New Zealand to apply to political asylum, and was arrested en route.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Informative)
Be assured that any "occupy" protests will be dealt with swiftly and severely.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Funny)
What was lacking is subtlety. You have to be careful when talking about Muhammad. He is a very important figure and they don't appreciate anyone saying something they consider to be blasphemous.
If you're going to insult such a revered figure, try to be more subtle.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
... terrorists such as individuals who voice their opinion
Especially if they do so in less than 140 characters.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
Malaysia was responding to an Interpol warrant. The real question is why Interpol cooperates in prosecuting thought crimes. Some heads are going to roll, and not just that of the arrested journalist..
Re: (Score:3)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index [wikipedia.org]
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a different problem in the USA. At least the people being killed are supposedly guilty of a real crime, mainly murder (I don't think you can be executed for anything less). Everyone in the world agrees that murder is a heinous crime and that people shouldn't be allowed to just murder others and not be punished for it somehow. The problem is that the judicial process used to try and convict these people is severely flawed, so that occasionally non-guilty people are executed for a crime they did not commit, like Troy Davis.
This, while certainly bad, is still a far cry from a country where people are routinely executed for things which should not be crimes (and even more, shouldn't be capital crimes, rather than slap-on-the-wrist crimes), such as leaving the Islamic religion, saying bad things about it, having sex outside of marriage, and many other petty things that here in the West simply aren't crimes at all for the most part (except for some silly European countries where for some dumb reason, they do prosecute people for "insulting a religion", but the penalty is usually a small fine like $100, i.e. slap-on-the-wrist).
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
Like Al Alwaki, an American citizen Obama executed by drone strike because of youtube videos? At least that is all we have to go on because he was never indicted, never charged, never given a trial before being "deprived of life" as REQUIRED in the constitution. Are you saying posting videos on youtube which the Feds don't like should be a death penalty offense? Because that's where we're at right now -- state sponsored murder due to content of speech. Seems like we're more on an equal footing with SA rather than morally superior.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Insightful)
Add to that the recent execution in Texas of a man virtually everyone with a IQ outside of single digits is certain was innocent, and its pretty clear that looking good, looking hard on crime, and being a righteous Christian hard-ass (sweet Jeebus my brain hurts just putting those words together into a single fscked-up gestalt!) trumps integrity, dignity, humanity or compassion. The U.S. isn't as screwed up as the Middle-East, but there are religious idiots working hard to get us there!
I have to agree that Interpol's complicity in this is shocking and bodes poorly for the global state of Human Rights.
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
The drone killings were bad when Bush did it. Obama has simply gone to the next level. Bush didn't kill Americans. Bush averaged 6.5 drone attacks per year. Obama is managing to get one in every four DAYS. With respect to drone attacks, the astounding fact of the matter is that Obama is 14x more evil than Bush, and considering what an evil SOB Bush was, that's amazing.
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/02/04/get-the-data-obamas-terror-drones/ [thebureaui...igates.com]
Re:A second just Justice.... Please (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Part of that may be systemic bias, the other part may very well be perfectly fair. After all, I'm pretty sure poor people tend to commit murders and other violent crimes more often middle-class or rich people. I'm also quite sure that black people tend to be poorer on average than white people (I won't get into the causes for this, historical, etc., just that that's the current state), and as said before, poor people tend to commit more violent crimes than others. Finally, what makes you think lower-IQ p
Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
Separation of State and Church = good.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
Differentiating "church" from "reality" is even better.
Re:Remember kids (Score:4, Insightful)
Religion = bad, and the current (YMMV over history) worst is Islam.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
No, you don't. You might think you do, but you don't. Everyone thinks THEIR religion is the exception. You aren't unique, just wrong. Even those that take atheism so serious to the point of it being "a religion" (ie: Leninism or militant anti-christianism) are just as bad.
The problem lies in having a belief system, not the content of the belief systems. Beliefs system don't require facts, so facts can't persuade them, no matter how obvious or proven the fact.
It is possible to believe in a higher power without following a belief system. It is possible to think that science can prove that some kind of "god" started the universe. You might be right or wrong, I don't claim to know, but this isn't the same as "religion". Religion, where you are TOLD what to think and discouraged from thinking freely, IS inherently bad, whether you or the mods understand it or not.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Informative)
How many people have you seen executed in the name of religion lately?
Me, personally? None.
But in Muslim countries where they follow Islamic law, there are lots of religious crimes for which people are executed.
In this case, the crime is "apostasy", or leaving the faith. I don't know of any person in recent history being executed for leaving the Christian faith in any of its variations; but in Islamic law apostasy can be and is punished by death.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy#Islam [wikipedia.org]
Another crime for which one can be executed under Islamic law: homosexuality. Note that I am not saying I personally consider homosexuality a crime (I don't), I am saying that under Islam this is a crime, it is punishable by death, and this actually happens [stophonourkillings.com] in the real world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Islam#Legal_status_in_modern_Islamic_nations [wikipedia.org]
So, either you need to find an explanation for why the above examples are not executions "in the name of religion" or you need to consider your point invalidated.
steveha
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you only count court-ordered execution? If not, a doctor was shot in the US in 2009 by anti-abortionists.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you only count court-ordered execution? If not, a doctor was shot in the US in 2009 by anti-abortionists.
You mean are acts of violence by fundamentalist individuals, subsequently prosecuted and punished severely for the crime, count the same as religious persecution institutionalized by government fiat?
Hmmm... yea, sure. Exactly the same. DAMN you, Theocratic religious tyrannical US government!!!
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Interesting)
Snark if you must, but it's been a long time since anyone in the US faced execution for stating that Jesus was a good, inspirational man, but not God. In fact, I'm not even sure that such a thing has ever happened. People have been killed by lynch mobs, but that's not a question of separating church and state, it's a question of people not being barbarous murderers.
In fact, according to Wikipedia, even as far back as the late 17th century, the British colonists' laws only punished blasphemers with some months in prison and a couple hundred dollars in fines. It's not nothing, but it's certainly not death.
Re: (Score:3)
The whole point of moving to America back then for most folks was to get away from religious persecution. The idea that no one should die because they have a different faith was ingrained in America from the most enlightened deist to the the most devout puritan.
Re:Remember kids (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the way they teach it in elementary school, but the Puritans were not exactly the most religiously tolerant folks. They did face laws in England restricting the ways religion could be practiced, but they didn't want to overturn the legal principles of state controlling religion, they just wanted to change the specifics of the law so that everyone would be forced to practice their way. When they set up in the Americas they promptly got to work enforcing religion as law. You may remember such examinations of their society as _The Scarlet Letter_ and historical events such as the Salem witch trials.
Re: (Score:3)
The whole point of moving to America back then for most folks was to get away from religious persecution. The idea that no one should die because they have a different faith was ingrained in America from the most enlightened deist to the the most devout puritan.
Nonsense. The whole point of moving to America (in those days, the colonies) was to do your own type of religious persecution.
Re: (Score:3)
Salem witch trials ring a bell?
Re: (Score:3)
Those trials weren't about heresy. They were a textbook case of mass hysteria. You could be a perfectly good Christian, never speak a word of blasphemy, but if you had a nervous tick or some unusual luck or (God help you) schizophrenia, people would panic, accuse you of being a witch, and kill you.
Even if we pretend that those trials were about heresy, they took place over three hundred years ago, nearly a century before the United States even existed as its own entity. I suppose you think the French are
Re: (Score:3)
As a matter of fact, I have heard of John Scopes. Have you? It doesn't seem like it, except maybe in passing, because otherwise you'd know that he did not spend time in prison. He was fined $100 (equivalent to ~$1000 in present day dollars), which was overturned by the appeals court on a technicality.
Now please, think very hard about whether you want to draw a moral equivalency between a $1000 fine and a death sentence. Try to remember that the post you're responding to acknowledged the fines, and merel
Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! (Score:5, Insightful)
"Sadly, the most likely outcome is that they are going to execute this man for three tweets."
Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?!
What is even worse is that Interpol acknowledges blasphemy as a crime.
This may give the world the impression that religions have substance and may be respected.
Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! (Score:5, Informative)
According to article 3 of Interpol's own constitution [interpol.int], they are explicitly forbidden to engage in matters of religious character. So either they were deceived about the nature of the "crime" or they ignored their own principles.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! (Score:5, Informative)
Because you obviously don't understand how Interpol works. Interpol is basically a big forum where various police agencies around the world share warrants, police investigations and the like. When one member country says they have warrants for joe smith, Interpol simply distributes the warrant and information to all other members nations. Interpol doesn't check the warrant or see why it's being issued, they just make a note in Joe Smith record and when it's pulled up by another country custom officers, they just see, so and so has warrant against them issued by another country and details of warrant. It's up to individual country to make determination if they are going to follow the warrant or not. 99.99% of the time, warrants are for stuff that all members countries that are consider illegal. Murder, rape, child related charges, drug traffic offenses.
Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! (Score:5, Interesting)
According to their own charter, they DO check the warrants. Ethical considerations demand that they do as well. They failed utterly.
Re:Why does Interpol even acknowledge this?! (Score:5, Interesting)
Interpol's Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] says that "[i]n order to maintain as politically neutral a role as possible, Interpol's constitution forbids it to undertake any interventions or activities of a political, military, religious, or racial nature." That, and "[u]ntil the 1980s Interpol did not intervene in the prosecution of Nazi war criminals in accordance with Article 3 of its Constitution forbidding intervention in 'political' matters."
So, Nazi war crimes are political, but insulting the Prophet is not religious. This does not surprise. Interpol's full name is the International Criminal Police Organization; it was called the the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC) prior to 1956. Past Presidents of the ICPC include Ernst Kaltenbrunner and Reinhard Heydrich. When Heydrich was planning the Final Solution at the Wannsee Conference, he was President of the ICPC. If you think that this background gives me a certain lack of respect for the ICPO, you are correct.
Why don't they just strip him... (Score:3)
... of his citizenship send him to a country where apostasy isn't a crime?
Or would the number of tweets fom like minded citizens hoping to duplicate his fortune crash twitter's servers?
Re: (Score:3)
Well I can give you the long answer or the short answer. The long answer is way, way too long. But the short answer is, because in a theocracy you have no freedom of expression or speech. And in turn the only way to keep the common people in line is by using religious law, and the fear of persecution. And when you have the chance to persecute someone for it. You do it, to throw the 'fear of god' in the rest, so they don't step out of line. And in turn, you keep control over your country, state, or wh
Moral High Ground (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What a difference a decade makes.
What, because the US also now executes people for being insufficiently deferential to the state religion?
Or is this just yet another misdirected, fuzzy-minded Julian Assange fanboy thing?
And these people are our strongest allies? (Score:3)
How much clearer does it need to be made to us, that our oil addiction is putting us in bed with some really, really objectionable regimes around the world?
Don't get me wrong, I'm no hippie on a bicycle, and I don't hate Muslims or their faith (at least, no more than I dislike Christians or Christianity) but when you've got nations involved in the whole "execution for apostasy" game, cut them off. Yes, geopolitics is hard, but we should never have let ourselves get put in a position where we'd support any regime like this.
Re:And these people are our strongest allies? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would have stopped considering them allies the second it was known that 16 out of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
Re: (Score:3)
The ruling family is our allies. Most of it's citizens are our enemies.
Knock off the Islam-bashing (Score:5, Insightful)
Man there's a heck of a lot of trolls commenting here.
Look, this is a problem of dictatorship, not of religion. The majority of the world's Muslims live in democracies and don't have such repressive laws. Muslims in America are aghast at such an unjust situation. Saudi is the backwards exception in the Muslim world. I'm a Muslim and I certainly don't support what's going on here.
Re: (Score:3)
The majority of the world's Muslims live in democracies and don't have such repressive laws.
What democracies? The ones like Malaysia, which deported this guy to his death?
Or the one like the newly democratic Egypt, where they're seriously debating whether to allow women to sit in the parliament or not, and whether they should go Sharia all the way right there and then, or blend religious and civil code?
Or the one like the newly democratic Libya, where al-Qaeda jihadi banner with shahada is now flying over the town hall?
Or the one like Iran, where they have revolted against tyranny, and then procee
Re: (Score:3)
Senegal
Haven't heard much about them, so perhaps you have a point there. Wikipedia says that they're mostly Sufi, which would help a lot - these folk tend to be much more liberal on many issues.
Albania
I wonder why Albania is the primary European hub of human trafficking (especially sexual slaves). Not saying that it has something to do with Islam - I simply don't know enough about Albania, though I do know that Islam explicitly permits female sexual slavery - but it certainly stands quite apart from most other European c
Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, Saudi Arabia is the exception. And Malaysia, since they're extradating the guy for what shouldn't even be a crime. OK; so Saudi Arabia and Malaysia are the exceptions.
And Pakistan, since there blasphemy is punishable by death. [wikipedia.org]
Alright, the Musim world is fine with these three minor exceptions, namely Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Pakistan.
Oh, and Iran, whee you can be sentenced to death for apostasy. [wikipedia.org]
I could go on, I really could, but I think I already made my point: you can excuse us, uninformed outsiders, when we make the broad conclusion that Islam is fucked up, generally speaking.
Re:Knock off the Islam-bashing (Score:5, Informative)
That's the thing, Muslims don't. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship that rules by a king who was installed by the British. Their meager population is 1.75% of all Muslims worldwide. Consider this, there are 2x as many Muslims in China than Saudi Arabia, should we judge Islam and Muslims based on that? (It's equally ridiculous)
Saudi Arabia has been criticized by every other Muslim country for its backwardness and repression. There is no other Muslim country that bans women from driving, and Muslim leaders abroad have led the call to pressure the King to drop the ban. Millions of Muslims like myself have signed petitions calling on them to recognize greater religious freedom and human rights. As a Muslim, I'd like to see an Arab Spring in Saudi, but unfortunately the US government has been selling the Saudi government weapons and tools to suppress the population. The Saudi king doesn't really own cows, so why is he importing thousands of cattle prods and giving them to the police forces?
Try actually talking to Muslims, or heck, reading Muslim blogs/tweets/newspapers, before you assume that we all support such an abomination. There's no place in the Quran where it says a king should ever rule over people.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, what can I do in New York, when Obama is selling billions of dollars of fighter jets, heavy guns, and cattle prods to the Saudi military and police?
My local mosque sent signed petitions to the Saudi king asking him to please lift the ban on women driving. It's the opposite of 1400 years of Islamic history. I wrote in my blog and twitter how I want the Saudi King to step aside and allow democracy to take place, but it's hard to make that happen when the US government firmly stands behind them. I voted
Not that much different from the US, actually (Score:3)
But we haven't. Let me suggest the following thought experiment to you: write on a large piece of posterboard "I skullfucked Mary and shit on Jesus' face." Now go stand with that poster on a streetcorner in Topeka, Kansas at 9 AM on Monday morning. Do you think you'll survive the day?
Of course these are purely mythical creatures, no more real than Arthur Dent or Allah or Harry Potter or Zeus or Loki or any other fiction. But, amazing, there are people on this planet -- including in Topeka, Kansas, in the heart of the United States -- who will attack and kill you for that sign.
Some will point out that at least this isn't codified into law: that is, that such attacks are extralegal. My response to that is (a) not yet, they aren't, although if you're paying any attention to contemporary American politics you know full well that there are numerous attempts underway to make Christianity the state religion and (b) it's not clear to me why, when you're lying in the street bleeding and dying, the lack of statutory authority will matter to you.
When we in the United States have progressed beyond this -- when we no longer live in a society where atheists are considered as trustworthy as rapists [jonathanturley.org] -- then perhaps we can claim some measure of the moral high ground here.
Re:This is what belief in skybeings (Score:4, Insightful)
MPAA:
You have illegally downloaded Harry Potter Movies.
You shall hereby be sentenced to death by hanging with a CAT-5 ethernet cable.
By order of:
The United Corporations Of America
Re:Malaysia is Muslim (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless you have a way to show that one moral system is better than another, you can't say one country's laws and preferences are better than another.
Luckily, it's actually very easy to compare laws and judicial systems, and find one - as informed by specific philosphical/moral tenets, and codified in a constitution - to be, in fact, plainly superior. That is, if rationality plays any role in the mechanisms by which you evaluate such things. I don't fee any urge to use crazy magical thinking as a standard by which to compare systems, so I have none of the trouble that some people - strangely, toxically - have with the need for moral relativism in order to remain politically correct and not hurt anyone's feelings.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Other people have morals based on other things, including not hurting people's feelings. How can you judge yours to be better, except to claim that your beliefs are better?
Re:Malaysia is Muslim (Score:5, Insightful)
How can you judge yours to be better,
Really? You can't summon the perspective to see that a moral system that stones women to death for teaching their daughters to read is fundamentally, objectively inferior to a system that doesn't do so?
Who cares if moral systems are based on different things? When they're based on death worship, for example, they are inherently, irrationally self destructive. When a moral code is based on lies (say, about the nature of the world around you) it is a code that embraces untruth as its foundation. Do you really find no means, in your own reckoning, to separate such a value system from one that seeks and acknowledges reality?
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you have a way to show that one moral system is better than another, you can't say one country's laws and preferences are better than another.
Since SA regularly executes people for "sorcery", I'm pretty sure I could identify a superior legal system or two.
Re:Malaysia is Muslim (Score:5, Interesting)
However, do not try to link one's opinion to an ideal the same to one that is a physical act. Further more, I fail to see how you would try to say the two are even more similar.
OK, I'll try to explain it.
Spreading child porn and blaspheming against god are both speech. That is it, there isn't any serious argument on this point.
In America, we oppose spreading child porn, in part because sometimes it hurts kids, but also because we tend to view sex-offenders as scum, and label them as scum for the rest of their lives. We prevent them from living close to schools, we create websites to easily look up where they live. It doesn't matter if no kids were harmed in the making of the porn, we still label them as such. Note, I am not a supporter of child porn, just trying to show how morally, these two things are similar.
In Saudi Arabia, blaspheming against god can ruin the lives of others, if you manage to convince them to be bad, etc. It also labels you as scum, undesirable, someone to be avoided. Their punishments for the particular crime are harsher, but in many ways it is similar to our child porn laws.
Now, I am personally opposed to condemning people for blasphemy, and I think anything that hurts little kids is horrible, but this is based on my own personal beliefs. I can understand the beliefs that the Saudis have that would make them come to different conclusions.
Re: (Score:3)
So you equate blashpemy with child porn? Seriously?
Re:Malaysia is Muslim (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... (Score:5, Insightful)
With Islam, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.
Turn the clock back 600 years or so (the difference in age between Christianity an Islam) and look at the behavior of the Catholic Church.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ....
Re:But Malaysia is moderate muslim.... (Score:5, Insightful)
But why should we?
This isn't a person's development we're talking about, where we can dismiss it by going "oh, poor Islam, his brain just isn't fully developed yet. Give him some time."
This is an organization who has had a dozen lifetimes just in your 600 year timeframe to watch and to see how things work without being insecure, murderous pricks, and that's not to mention the however many more lifetimes they have had to "mature" to begin with. At this point there is little to say but that they are actively rejecting the concept.
This is not a defense of Christianity, nor is it some ridiculous finger pointing as to who started it; I think all religions are a pox upon the world. But the idea that Islam somehow should get an extra 600 years to find itself before being criticized as extremist or intolerant is ludicrous. It's not the middle ages anymore.
Re:A religion of peace? (Score:4, Insightful)
What are you babbling about? As a Muslim, I know that Muhammad, peace be upon him, died 1400 years ago, while God never dies. You still say Islam puts him above God; the Being who created all of the galaxy and existence?
Look, if Muhammad were alive today, he would not stand for such an injustice being done in his name. He was known to have people spit in his face and physically assault him, and he forgave them and spared them from punishment. What the Saudi dictatorship is doing is quite the opposite of Islam and islamic history.