"Now as we just heard in the news, sms are spreading among taxi draviers about a new demonstration in Oslo, against the publishing of the muhammod caricature in Dagbladet. As we also heard, Islamic Council of Norway discourage muslims from taking part in the friday demonstration. So, yesterday, the head of Dagbladet, Chief Imam of Norway (and Sheik Amir) to debate about the caricature problem, but the News paper didn't want to apologise. Amir Sheik, you are Citycouncillior of
Oslo Concervatives and you are also leader of the Foundation for Peace. Why are many muslims having this reaction?"
~Studio reporter.
- "It is a hurtful picture of the prophet muhammod on the first page of Dagbladet. I apprichiated that Dagbladet reported that PST had a link to this picture and they also tried to explain that the majority of musims do get offended, and wanted them (PST) to appologise. But in the same time printing the caricature on the first page. PST removed the links on their Facebook page, but Dagbladet publish it, which has angered 150 000 (norwegian) muslims."
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "As you may know, it's not many people who read Dagbladet anymore and have jet to see it. Why is it so hurtful?"
~Studio reporter.
- "We see the prophet in a cartoon, which hurt. In that we see the pig which writes in the Koran which has offended me alot. I feel discriminated, and in the meeting I took initiative, it was the prupose to get peacefull sollutions to this issue. That we concluded this case in a clean propper way. muslims. But Director of Dagbladet acted arrogant in the meeting, and not humble. They did not show understanding of for the fact that they has offended 150 000 norwegian muslims and would not apologise. So I hope the Director would think well on this, and also in the future, that they may describe it literally, but not with picture."
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "Lars Helle, you are responsible editor of Dagbladet, why did you publish a large picture of the prophet muhammod as a pig?"
~Studio reporter.
-"The size can be debated, but we printed it because it was relevant to the case. We had a case on this, about these links on PST's facebook pages. That first, the Police's Security Service (PST) had opend up more to the public media and the fact that these pictures was a case worth publishing. This, both I and Sheik agree on, and when Dagbadet publish a case about religous symbols or other things - then it must be our obvious right to publish it with the most relevant illustration. In this case we found it right to illustrate it with this controversial cartoon which was linked to
. ~Dagbladet director said.
- "Now you have managed to hurt Sheik and other muslims in Norway, but you don't want to apologise. Why not?"
~Studio reporter.
- "No, to make a news paper will always engage and offend people, and that we must prepare for, and offcouse, Dagbladet knew this would be controversial, but it's not like we must apologise for this. We use our obvious right to among other things, publish this. I also want to add, Dagbladet allways have debate if we have offended someone, but yesterday, they wanted a predetermined sollution to the problem - and that might be the only thing Dagbladet can not give, an apology.
~Dagbladet director said.
- "I must disagree, I was at the meeting yesterday. Both I and the Imam made this importent: That we wanted to give... some form of positive news to mitigate the already problematic situation. However, the director showed no mercy nor sign that he understand the problem. Still today, he does not understand that. I feel disciminated, and I hope you understand that and that you will apologise"
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "I think we have a diffrent understanding of the meeting which took place. I acknowledge that you and many feel discriminated by the publisment, but that is something I can't do - because you want to take over the editing and make rules of what we can publish"
~Dagbladet director said.
- "Why can't we censurate this picture? Why must we publish a violating picture? ..When you know what the result will be."
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "We don't have to publish anything, but we must have our obviously right to publish and edit our own paper, ....."
~Dagbladet director said.
- "Then you have hurt us"
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "....yes, but so does every other paper everyday (to everyone)."
~Dagbladet director said.
- "Why was Dagbladet the only one who published the picture?"
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "Dagbladet had covered this before, and every paper definds their own paper."
~Dagbladet director said.
"Then there is history behind this paticular picture: It's a pig, with a dachasie (sp?), a palestinian headscarf and it's written muhammad in english and arabic on the pig. The pig then writes on a book "Koran" in arabic. The creator of this caricature was Tatshana Shosken (sp?), who were between 25 - 27 when she made it. She was also a Hebron settler, and she was a member of Kaokch (sp?). A jewish party which is a terrorist party, in regards to the Israeli government. She was on her way to publically display this caricature. She did it, and were arrested. She was convcted and judged for racist action and violation of religious feelings - 2 years."
~Sidsel Wold, Middel eastern reporter skype in Israel.
- "What conswquences did this result in?"
~Studio reporter.
- "Other then that she was jailed and the president of Israel had to apologise for this, resulted in a number of public collisions. 24 people were wounded, but also in other parts of the world. In Kenya there was revolt, and in other arab citys were there heavy demonstratoions."
~Sidsel Wold, Middel eastern reporter in Israel.
- "But why is this paticular image so terrible?"
~Studio reporter.
- "It is because the pig is a unclean animal, and the worst thing you can relate is the prophet muhammod with an unclean animal. And the fact that this pig writes in the most holy book in Islam, which violate feelings and people get temprered about"; "and maybe becuase Norwegian Imam's know that we(reporters) know this - which can make this an additional baggage load in the debate".
~Sidsel Wold, Middel eastern reporter in Israel.
- "Director, did you know this backround to this paticular image?"
~Studio reporter.
- " That it was the same cartoon which caused noice 10-12 years back - no, although I remembered there was some kind of trouble, but I don't think norwegian muslims resambles this with it's history - because you linked this yesterday (tuesday, after the meeting IIRC :S)."; "I also want to add a positive point to yesterdays meeting, which Sheik has not mentioned - that I and Sheik agreed upon freedom of expression. A good debate, not just 'arrogance'."
~Dagbladet director said.
- "In yesterdays meeting, you said you were not afraid of the saftey of your employee's, but that you were worried about the situation. What did you mean?"
~Studio reporter.
- "When we had a good hour talking about this, and presented our views about freedom of expression and commen resposibility that this does not evolve into someting outisde the bounderies of freedom of expression - we then did not reach (sheik's) commen conclusion: that we would agree. By that I feel that the Imam and Sheik presented a disclaimer of the possibe outcome, which I feel was critical. That it did not present the meeting. That they present the meeting as entierly diffrent, just because I would not apologise.Which aggraveted the situation, not mitigated it."
~Dagbladet director said.
- "Do you understand that you added upon tension to the situation?"
~Studio reporter.
- "Let me underline: It was I who took the initiative to begin a (diplomatic) dialog, not Dagbladet. I, as a muslim. I called both the Imam( a central representative) and Lars (the Dagbladet director) to partisipate in a meeting, and they both agreed to bargin (and debate). In a dialog meeting both parts need to give and take, but in this meeting, the Chief director had nothing to add."; "He could not even understand that he had hurt 150 000 muslims
*...* and I also would like to point out that violence and terror is condemmed in Islam. The Koran condem it on the strongest, and those who practice terror have ony one mission - that is to injure Islam around the world and we can see that they have been successful in this"
~Sheik, concervative politician said
-* "That is not true"
~Dagbladet director said.*
- "We also have a third person here Shazia Sarwar, Editor of the multi culturel magazine, X - Plosive. You follow this and you know the musim community quite good - What do you think happend after this? On one hand, there have been sendt sms about new (taxi?) demonstations, jet Islamic Council say they should not."
~Studio reporter.
- "It's unrealistic to demand that Dagbadet must apologize for this, (becuase) I think it's importent that we guard freedom of expression. Then, we can ask the question if this is necceseary, because as reporters - we do have responsibility. All expressions comes with responsibility. So if you first choose to print something which can offend, then you must have open ears if people react. I will also advice that they can rather send this to
PFU (The press' academic organ, the journalistic complaint organ). If that (PFU) does not succeed, then a court. But if norwegian muslims want to demonstrate, then they must be allowed to such. When it comes to the Taxi demonstrations, she personally understand the why and the fact that they were listend to as a result - which has a higher democratic value, then what any minor legal issues produced".
~Shazia Sarwar, editor of X - Plosive.
- "But why does they (taxi protesters) not stop, now as the Islamic Council has adviced them to?"
~Studio reporter.
- "It's a presumed a protest on friday, and that is their right if they feel that is their best way to express themself."; "This is mostly young men, is my predictment, which I belive it's importent to listen, because it's alot of frustration and I think a demonstration act as a pressure valve. It would be unwise to showe them away and speculate, even as we disagree with guarding the freedom of expression"..
~Shazia Sarwar, editor of X - Plosive.
- "Sheik, you have been trying to create dialog, but you are not happy with the result. What will happend from now?"
~Studio reporter.
- "I feel we have accoplished what we wanted. We have clearly mentioned were we stand on this and we know where Dagbladet stand. We have also both expressed our opinion. The best sollution is to solve this via dialog, not with demonstrations."
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "So you want to encurage your buddys who drive taxi, to keep driving?"
~Studio reporter.
- "I think they must show trust to us who mediate on a peacefull method."
~Sheik, concervative politician said
- "Lars (the director), how long until you publish a muhammod caricature on the front page again?"; "Are you suprised about the reaction?"
~Studio reporter.
- "That can only the news picture control. That can be tomorrow. The day after, or many years"; " And no, I'm not suprised"; "I also want to add that the reactions Dagbladet has recived are completly acceptable withing the freedom of expression. Offcourse they have the right to express and demonsrate, and that it how it should be. I also want to encurage them to file a complaint to PFU."
~Dagbladet director said.
My islamic talk (OP edited)
:
, if this thread does not steer back into a relevant debate (inregards to the EM&M-forum) soon -- then mods may move this to the Mudpit/Academy to die like other threads....
Originally Posted by Finn
Reply With Quote
