Gibbons was found guilty. She was spared the lash after apologizing to the court for any offence she had caused. She will spend the next 15 days in a Sudanese prison. Her friends will need to bring her food and water, because in a Muslim culture like Sudan, western standards of human decency do not exist.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, said he was “extremely disappointed” with the sentence and summoned Omer Siddig, the Sudanese Ambassador, to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to explain the decision. Mr Miliband said: “We are extremely disappointed that the charges against Gillian Gibbons were not dismissed. Our clear view is that this is an innocent misunderstanding by a dedicated teacher. Our priority now is to ensure Ms Gibbons’s welfare.” He said he wanted to discuss “the next steps” with his Sudanese counterpart.
Source: Mohamed teddy bear teacher, Gillian Gibbons, is spared lash but gets 15 days in jail - Times Online
You know, I'm pissed about this case too. I don't have the power of the British government behind me, but I can take action. I shall protest in a useless manner. I propose naming something entirely inappropriate after Mohamed. In my case, a part my anatomy that I refer to as "George W." will be renamed "Mohamed". It's fitting.
16 comments:
I usually agree, or at least,
sympathize with you, but I can't on this one.
While I find the idea of "40 lashes" barbaric and cruel, I also find the idea of a teacher living in a foreign country who has not undertaken the elementary research needed to avoid offending her hosts inexplicable. It's not like Sudanese law is some sort of secret code nor is the shari-a hidden away from the eyes of mere mortals, like Joseph Smith's golden tablets.
It often puzzles me that folks who diligently learn currency exchange rates fail to apply themselves to the vastly more important cultural differences.
Ms. Gibbons did not deserve the lash, but deportation may be a favor to her.
Forget about every law and every country...Plus do not think about any religion for some time.
Then answer a question: Does any body has a right to humiliate a person revered by others? Fullstop
I believe your answer will be: NO
If you respect any person, if I do not agree with that person, then considering your emotions, I must keep quiet and must not say anything.
This is only option here.
Secondly, the attitude of the British government is inexplicable considering the fact it is a blatant interference in the domestic affairs of another country.
Let justice prevail!
If Ms Gibbons committed some mistake, even innocently, then she should be punished leniently so that someone else with bad intentions should not take advantage of it.
Why do you have such disdain for your member? Naming your johnson Mohammud or George W.?!!
I find attitudes toward sexuality so schizoidal.
Our ultimate insults refer to coitus and fellatio. Our shame and loathing of percieving genitalia and lovemaking as dirty and nasty is such a sad, sad legacy of puritanism.
Naming your anal sphincter, or the effluvia that comes from it, Mo or W, now that I understand...
OOPs, forgive my last entry. I assumed you were talking about your johnson. My bad.
she didn't do anything.. the fucking KIDS did... so how is it HER fault, Dean? I mean WTF? No matter if she did it or not, this kind of punishment to absurd. ESPECIALLY since it is judged on by Religious doctorine... THIS IS UTTER BULLSHIT! This is the reason I hate religion.. because no matter how many roses you try to cover it up with... its still all a big pile of steaming SHIT!
And Mojoey.. I will go one further.. every time I take a DUMP/SHIT/POO whatever you want to call it.. it is now taking a Mohamed...
Am I the only one that think all of this is just a bit insane.. I mean why the fuck are we even argue about this.. it is clear that it is all bullshit and still people are SOOO fucking naive and simpleminded that they would rather have false hope that truth... fucking idiots... UGH...
I apologize mojoey.. I just had to vent.
I propose naming something entirely inappropriate after Mohamed.
I think all Americans should name their cats Mew-hammed and their dogs Mutt-hammed. As far as their private parts, I leave it to the discretion of the individual. (Mojoey: If you go ever so slightly lower on your anatomy, you could have both George W. and Mohammed.
aamer asks, "Does any body has a right to humiliate a person revered by others?"
I think that's the wrong question. The better question is, should any government have the right to prosecute and punish (torture) someone based on a perceived offense that causes no actual harm?
This is another fine example of tolerance taken far past the level of obeisance and into the realm of obsequious deference in favor of religious tradition and custom over common sense and rationality. This is something we all should be concerned about, just as we claim to be concerned about humanitarianism worldwide, with no national boundaries (which is why it was felt proper to try Saddam and others for violations of international humanitarian law). If Sudan's treatment of those within its borders (visitors or not) violates humanitarian law, we should not give it a free pass to do so merely because it has religious backing. Religion should not ever be allowed as a shield of justification for any action.
Mojoey, sphincter Mohammed is not as good as 'roid Bush, but it's a close second. Yeah, ok, that doesn't make any sense.
Johnny Crow cracked me up, too. I just had a hot cup of coffee and that means I have to "take a mohammed"...lol.
dean,
While I agree that dumb people desirve what they get. I do not agree that naming a teddy bear should constitute a grave crime. People actually called for her death. It is one reason I find religion so dangerous.
aemer,
In answer to your question. Yes - I have the right to say call Mohamed a nutball. It's called free speach, a concept that does not exist in Sudan.
screw Mohamed.
Anon - I love my member. I would never name it after somebody I don't like. Now my anus - well Mohamed it is.
johnny - right on - I took a stinky Mohamed today...
Mojoey said...
dean,
While I agree that dumb people desirve what they get. I do not agree that naming a teddy bear should constitute a grave crime. People actually called for her death. It is one reason I find religion so dangerous.
I don't disagree with you, joe. The shari-a in fact refers to animals, not stuffed toys, but this isn't any stranger than the US Gov insisting marijuana is a narcotic (a pharmacologic silliness) or Rev. Fred Phelps insisting IEDs are god's way of punishing America for allowing homosexuals to live. Just because religious bigotry is ubiquitous doesn't make it right.
However, becasue it is widespread, nice white women from the UK who choose to live in a Muslim nation should probably read up on the society of that nation before moving there and living under that legal system. I can't imagine Ms. Gibbons naming her dog, "God" (although an anorexic would have no problem with it), and therefore I maintain that she, through inattention or carelessness, undervalued the import of that silly religion to those people among whom she chose to live.
In that sense, regardless of the rationality of the rule, she did carelessly bring this upon herself. I'm glad she was spared the lashes, but I despair she'll learn the real lesson.
Dean
In order for the joke to work, please replace "anorexic" with "dyslexic". Thank you.
In appreciation, please accept the following jokes:
Didja hear about the Dyslexic Theatre Musical? Yeah, they're doing "Annie get Your Nug."
There once was a dyslexic agnostic - he lay awake at night wondering if there really was a dog.
Dean
"Offense is what people take when they can't take argument"
This whole incident is the product of religionists using a contrived standard for actions. Instead of looking at the real consequences of naming a teddy bear "mohammed", they apply some made-up standard.
Instead of saying to themselves: "I wonder what would really happen if you named a teddy bear after some dead guy?" these bronze-age bumpkins apply a made-up standard that holds no logical value.
What is particularly disgusting about this event is the behavior of the UK govt, the school officials, and many other westerners who had the opportunity to use this to show the power of rational thought. Instead, we find them groveling and asking for forgiveness for their "offense."
In many ways, it would be best to just let these spiritual nuts wallow in their own ignorance. Close the school and call it a day.
http://jdcrow.blogspot.com/2007/12/taking-mohamed-warning-offensive.html
I decided to write about...
Enjoy!
Help support Gillian, get your own "Muhammad" teddy here:
http://www.cafepress.com/mynameismo
Post a Comment