Bismillah [hidayahnet] (unknown)

Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:14:58 -0800

Assalamua'laikum.......

Tuan/Puan cuba baca temubual bersama Editor suratkhabar Jyllands Posten Laknatullah... Memang diaorang nih angkuh......... Sebab tuh la kita umat Islam kena ajar diaorang nih yang suka persenda umat Islam. Boikot ke atas barangan Danish adalah salah satu tindakan yang saya rasa amat patut. Prime Minister Denmark pun tak suruh malaun nih minta maaf!! sila rujuk www.jd.dk
 
Ada pulak NGO kita nasihatkan umat Islam tak seharusnya cepat melatah..... Satu nasihat yang tak perihatin yang melambangkan lemahnya iman mereka...
 
Semoga Allah azabkan kafir laknatullah ini dengan siksaan yang amat pedih di dunia dan di akhirat......... Amiin..
 
P/S: Benarlah sabda Nabi Muhammad, bahawa Allah akan memadamkan rasa gerun musuh Islam terhadap Islam... - Salah satu tanda kedatangan kiamat...
 
The editor's dilemma
Interview by Pierre Collignon, published on the 5th of February 2006
Editor Carsten Juste's decision to print 12 drawings depicting the Prophet Mohammed has released an unprecedented storm of protests directed against Denmark. On Monday night, Juste issued an apology for having hurt the feelings of Muslims around the world. But what exactly does this apology mean? And when it comes to satirizing Islam, how much further can we expect the Jylland-Posten boss to go in the future?

During the first four months after greenlighting publication of the Mohammed drawings, editor-in-chief Carsten Juste categorically refused to allow the word `apology' to pass his lips.
Daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten cannot, and will not, offer an apology for publishing 12 drawings of the prophet Mohammed. `To do so would be to fail the many generations before us who have fought for freedom of _expression_,' Juste repeated time and again.
On Monday night, however, a new message was released from the newspaper boss's corner office at Ravnsbjerg Bakke, just outside the city of Aarhus. In a statement addressed to the: `Honourable fellow citizens of the Muslim world' - the statement now acknowledged that the drawings, despite not being in conflict with Danish law, had 'indisputably' offended many Muslims, 'for which we must apologise'.
Juste himself characterizes use of the word `apology' as a `semantic manoeuvre' and emphasises that his newspaper's position in the Mohammed dispute remains the same as always:
`Part one is that we maintain our freedom of _expression_. We will never apologise for that. Therefore we cannot apologise for publishing the drawings. Part two is that we regret offending the many Muslims who took offence. What's new is that we have now simply added an apology to part two.'
For Juste, it was the escalation of the affair over last weekend that became the decisive factor: Danish citizens in the Middle East felt their lives were being threatened.
The decisive factor for Juste was an escalation of the situation over the weekend. Danes in the Middle East feared for their lives.
`This is what tipped the scales,' says the Jylland-Posten's editor-in-chief.
A group of representatives from the Danish media were in Jordan's capital, Amman, on Monday, participating in a deal Danish news bureau Ritzau is negotiating with its Jordanian counterpart, Petra. This meant that news bureau bosses from most of the Middle East met together with ambassadors and the leader of the Danish-Egyptian Institute for Dialogue, Jakob Skovgaard-Petersen.
According to Juste this meeting presented the `perfect opportunity' to deliver a message to the entire Middle East in one go. That evening, Skovgaard-Petersen planned to make a speech. Why not use the occasion to read out a new statement from 'the Danish newspaper with the notorious drawings'?
`I sent the material over in the first instance in Danish. I had of course written that we regretted offending Muslims - that that had not been our intention. But they wanted to know why I hadn't written `apologise' instead. 'Arabs believe that the word `regret' is too weak, but they know what an apology is.' I sat here in my office considering this advice. I was well aware that by following it I could be giving the impression we had apologised for everything, when in fact we had not. I thought to myself, if this is a way of offering a small contribution, a way of helping to solve what was becoming an increasingly violent problem, then we'll do it. It won't hurt us. So I pressed the button.'
Has the prime minister or any other leaders from the Danish business world been in touch asking you to come forward with an apology?
`No, they haven't. They seem to be smart enough to know when it's best to leave something alone.'
According to one expert in rhetoric, Christian Kock, your apology does not constitute a real apology. He compares it with a situation where you left a rake out on a garden path, which hit your neighbour when he trod on it. You apologise that the neighbour hit himself. But you won't apologise for having left the rake upturned ...
`I see the comparison, but I don't think many others, aside from Christian Kock, can. The bottom line is, this was the recommendation I received from experts within this cultural area and in the Arabic language.'
Normally a person simply apologises for something he or she has done. You don't normally apologise for other people being upset about it. In this context, what is your newspaper's apology really worth?
`We apologise for having offended Muslims - that must easy to understand. But there wasn't much time, and I wanted to have a statement ready by that evening. It needed to go quickly, so there wasn't time to call in Christian Kock.'
Some imams have demanded not just an apology, but an undertaking that Jyllands-Posten will not publish drawings of the Prophet again. Can you promise that?
`No, I can definitely not promise not to do it again. It could be that we won't do it again, but we can't make that a promise. If we did, we would be curbing freedom of _expression_.'
But will you do it again?
`I have already said that we will take a break, but of course I cannot rule out that if a situation comes along where it seems relevant to do it, then we must do it.'
What is today's editorial line in relation to satirical drawings of Islam and the prophet Mohammed in Jyllands-Posten?
`The editorial policy is that we will not rule out the possibility of publishing drawings of Mohammed in a relevant context. One can see that the drawing of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban particularly sticks in their caw. We would be very unlikely to publish a drawing like that.'
Why not?
`Because so many people were offended by that one drawing in particular. That tells us that if that really is the case, then we have ethical standards ordering us to be cautious.'
Should the newspaper be more careful about satirising Islam as opposed to Christianity?
`Today we should, but we ought also to be honest and remember that a few years ago were equally considerate of devout Christians. The position that you don't publish drawings highly likely to offend certain beliefs is nothing new. We have held this position for many years. There are a lot of our illustrators who know what it's like to have me reject their drawings.'
So you're saying that we should be more cautious in regards to Islam than in regards to Christianity?
`Christianity has developed a certain lifestyle in the secular modern society, and that means that these kinds of problems generally don't appear nowadays.'
Could you consider the possibility that the newspaper might, in smaller doses, be able to accustom Muslims to satire? One could possibly publish the drawing with the bomb in 20 years?
`I have my doubts. In a way I can also understand the indignation. We wouldn't want Jesus drawn in highly compromising situations. I don't believe that the bomb drawing was highly compromising. Terrorists address themselves to Mohammed, and in my eyes the drawing was therefore a depiction of fundamentalists' own abuse of the image of Mohammed.'
If you won't publish these kinds of drawings again, does that mean you have learnt something from all of this?
`You could say that, and in the end there's no harm in saying it. We have done the same thing in many other situations with Christians. I have learned from my conversations with Muslims that their relationship with Mohammed is similar to a loving relationship. It is a kind of relationship we ordinary cultural Christians simply can't imagine.'
Will this result in less freedom of _expression_ at the newspaper?
`It will not result in less freedom of _expression_ than we had when we rejected depictions of Christian figures that clearly went over the line.'
If the goal for you and the newspaper is to strike a blow for freedom of _expression_, hasn't it ended badly?
`No, not directly, but we really cannot answer yet. We have demonstrated that there is self-censorship in Denmark. We have clearly shown that illustrators, artists, journalists, and the like practice self-censorship, and that they see the Muslim segment of the population as a group to which one must pay particular regard.'
What does the fight consist of now for the newspaper?
`There is an ongoing battle to be waged on behalf of freedom of _expression_. But sometimes we need to adjust the way we use this freedom, for example in relation to Muslims.'
But if you said that you would not publish the bomb drawing again, haven't you then given in to the conflict?
`No. I may have grown wiser on this point, but that doesn't mean we give up the battle. What I will fight for is that we can continue to question religious dogmas, traditions, and forces of habit. If we can't do that, society comes to a standstill.'
At one point you said to Berlingske Tidende newspaper that the opposition had won.
`True. It was almost a deep sigh of relief. When you look at it coldly and matter-of-factly, you have to admit that publishing the drawings created so much trouble, insecurity, threats and rebellion, I can hardly imagine any Danish newspaper will approach the problem in the same way we did for at least the next generation.'
Over the past week, a number of European newspapers have published the drawings in support of freedom of _expression_. Maybe it's not so hopeless as your sigh could have led us to believe?
`Better late than never. You can't expect these foreign newspapers to get involved in our domestic debates. I have criticised a large part of the Danish daily press for having done too little. They've been busier trying to find out if Jyllands-Posten had ulterior motives, than they have been with defending freedom of _expression_. It quickly became clear that what should have been a trifling matter developed into a case involving some of Western society's most precious principles. What I would have liked is some solidarity from the rest of the domestic press in the name of freedom of _expression_.'
Who are you thinking of specifically?
`I'm thinking specifically about our two rival morning newspapers, Berlingske Tidende and Politiken. They say their mission is to forge popular opinion. But I think we can agree they have failed.'
If you had known what was going to happen, would you have published the drawings?
`This is a hypothetical question based on hindsight, but if I knew Danes living abroad might become endangered, then I wouldn't do it. I don't think any editor-in-chief would. The stakes get simply too high. I probably would have suggested that we attack this as a journalistic challenge in another way.'
Would you say that you regret it?
`No. I don't regret anything. Newspapers must be written forwards, if I may rephrase our good friend Kierkegaard.'
Jyllands-Posten's cultural editor, Flemming Rose, said on Wednesday on television that he disagrees with you on this point. He would still have published the drawings, even knowing what it could lead to. Is there a split in the newspaper's leadership?
`I spoke with Flemming Rose about this issue afterwards, It's built on a misunderstanding. We agree that in the ultimate hypothesis, where we knew for sure human lives were at stake, then we would have acted differently. That said, Flemming Rose has made a great contribution to explaining the newspaper's point of view, and has the right to his own opinion.'
Are you satisfied with the way the newspaper has communicated its position throughout this situation?
`You can't do this kind of thing without misunderstandings. People misunderstand. Nevertheless opinion polls are showing a massive majority of the population support us, so the outlook is not completely bleak.'

Bring words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with your Yahoo! Mail.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

All views expressed herein belong to the individuals concerned and do not in any way reflect the official views of Hidayahnet unless sanctioned or approved otherwise.

If your mailbox clogged with mails from Hidayahnet, you may wish to get a daily digest of emails by logging-on to http://www.yahoogroups.com to change your mail delivery settings or email the moderators at [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the title "change to daily digest".



SPONSORED LINKS
Divine inspiration Islam

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Kirim email ke