Screenshots

Who the [ DELETED ] wrote that?

If you did wrong, you did wrong; doesn't freakin matter if Jeff Ooi or others are just waiting for you to trip up.

Instead of [ DELETED ] apologising for the mistake, the stupid [ DELETED ] are trying to make it seem that they are the injured party here.

Dudes, just own up and take it like a man ... stupid [ DELETED ].

damn...
they've the rights to defend themselves, but attacking the messengers?

I feel sorry for you Jeff, for highlighting an issue of interest but having NST shoot you (hey free publicity!) on page 2 of its national daily.

I feel sorry for our country too, for I've no other words to describe how I feel about all that's been happening in our country.

Look who's eyeing the crosshair now...

I'm not surprised they may spin or conspire this to nab the whistle-blower, i.e. thy blogger.

Applause! Hypocrisy to the highest level when they said "What are we saying of our own selves and country if we allow people with personal motives to capitalise on religious and racial sensitivities to victimise others".

Eat your own words, NST. Eat your own words.

Just as I fully support Jeff Ooi's thinking allowed and thinking aloud blogging session here, I am also of the opinion that NST has every right to criticise Jeff Ooi's blog for sensationalising the issue.

Getting upset with this cartoon strip depicting someone drawing a caricature is indeed ridiculous and uncalled for. This is just an opportunity for those overzealous religious and PAS officials to seize this opportunity for some political mileage. They can make police reports but we should stand firm for not allowing them to do as they please.

The question is when do we draw the line? We cannot allow the slightest provocation of these Ulamaks, Lebai or any religious officials to dictate us what is freedom of speech here.

[ DELETED - Don't hijack my blog topic by dragging in the Jews and other religions. Stay on course on the core issue and keep your religious bigotry to yourself. Let me repeat, don't make a sermon out the core issue in this blog topic.

Jeff,
You defended your action of linking the cartoon pictures showing the caricatures in total, to your topic in this blog.
Disgusting... damn disgusting.

THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK.... yes, that's how I view this issue between NST and you, Jeff.

I like this "let us ponder the fundamental issue — do we continue to be a society where a vocal few, with personal vendettas and less than honourable motives, can whip up sentiments and make the innocent guilty?"

Well, Jeff. You stand accused here of personal vendetta and less than honourable motives!

How say you???? Until then my 50 years of indoctination implores me to stand by the nation's mouth piece for whom when it is not reported it did not happen. For whom when they do report, then it is fact!! So until they, the NST, carry your rebuttal, you Mr Jeff Ooi are one with "personal vendettas and less than honourable motives"!

*sigh* i cry for my country. again it is the whistle-blower that kena hentam.

my view is action should be taken against NST, if not for people crying out 'double standard!'.

i did hold the view right in the beginning harsh action should not be taken against sarawak tribune, and action agaisnt guangming but since the gomen already did, then it is only right they take action on NST too.

the NST article asked "does the cartoon mock islam?". of course it did! straight away people can tell that. muhamad's name was used (though strikeoff). the cartoon obviously was done to capitalise on the current denmark caricatures controversy. it was mocking islam in a way that ok let's do a caricature of muhamad but then because of the denmark carircature controversy, we should not do it, hence the strike-off of muhamad's name.

Fap fap fap fap go the pundits.

if no actions taken against NST, then its a discrimnation against the 'indefinite suspended' Sarawak Tribune..well, Sarawak look like an adopted state...damn...
well, you may see this as 'dragging' to other core issue..but in reality, its really that big..try to see it in the perspective form across the South China Sea..if this is really freedom of speech indeed...

I agree with lucia that the govt must be consistent in its handling of this issue as actions already taken on Guangming and Sarawak Tribune (though I do not agree with the harsh punishment on Sarawak Tribune). Otherwise it will lose its credibility and integrity and the minister will be accused of practising double standards if no action is taken.

Perhaps a 2-week suspension will be appropriate.

And the [ DELETED ] went and re-published the cartoon, to prove what?

That you got balls?

That you're defending principles?

You have no [ DELETED ] priciples!?!

The day the NST decided to support the view that it is not right to publish religiously offensive material was the day the newspaper relinquished the right to publish stuff such as the cartoon now in question.

So what [ DELETED ] purpose does it serve to republish the cartoon?

Which [ DELETED ] decided that the NST should not apologise and fight it the way that they have chosen to - blame the messenger and the complainants.

I don't [ DELETED ] care if the people who made the police reports have "hidden agendas", because I found the cartoon insensitive, and I dare say, so do many other Muslims in this country.

Bro! Don't worry they will get away from it!! ha ha ha..... this case sama juga macam AP case. You all make big hoo ha... end of the day if God says NST stay they will stay...

What was NST trying to prove by publishing the comic, twice? that they are BN's newspaper hence they can do it, while Guangming and Sarawak Tribune cannot because they are not wagging their tails to BN?

I am opening my eyes big big to see if there's double standard in this blasphemy issue this time.

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.

I don't see this as "shooting the messenger" because I believe the right to criticise should also include an equal opportunity for the injured party to fight back.

Of course, the argument would be different if NST has the right to close you down or force you to resign.

I congratulate the NST for writing in defence of itself and "republishing" the cartyoon.

I appreciate Jeff your stand -- and may I suggest -- the one core issue here has become enmeshed with precedent differences vis-a-vis NST and yourslef-lus-Kadir which I won't care to go into.

The is core issue here is same or similar to what I conetnded in respect of Guang Mind's report carrying a reader looking at a newspaper carrying a picture of one(or more ?) "Prophet Muhammad caricature" in breaking the story (from an AFP account) -- to me it should not have been found gulity of a breach of the PPPA 1984 -- so also this latest NST caricature ... If we are to hold the Government to the impartial treatment of all media, let's stand firm that GM did NOT commit an offence (hence it got away with just a 2-week suspension, also for only ther EVENING edition -- stressed here because up to now, many readers here still think the paper's day edition is also suspended, wrt "whatsoever"(?) in another Conversation).

Jeff: so on this occasion, I'm afraid both you and NST are letting EXTRANEOUS issues to cloud your exchange, which is sad for Journalism and Blogging, 4th and 5th Estates which should be convergent in progressing their closely enmeshed roles, NO?

When NST itself join the gun shooting others local paper of being "insensitive" by "republishing facts that allow the reader do their own judgement", isn't it hypocrisy when NST did it?

Alas, when somebody show the hypocrisy, I see NST and commenter like YgArif straight away say the previous blog are personal.

Just go check the previous blog.

"The readers asked me whether the cartoon is tentamount to mocking Prophet Mohammad?"

So which part of the above tell you Jeff agree/disagree on the reader question?

If the paper republish a politikus talk, you don't need a fine print to think it does not represent the paper own standing. With execption of republishing readers letter, You don't need to print a line to say that,"the above speech/writing/etc does not represent the paper point of view".

So NST should explain whether they are poor on English language or they are so dumb that need Jeff to put the point of view reminder .

Hey Jeff, don't you have a program that censors your readers' language? Like f***ing? Whoa Aisehman is really uptight, isn't he? So full of angst! I recommended your blog to younger relatives - to develop thinking skills ... widen their worldview. But I'm now embarrassed for pointing them to such unrestrained display of foul language.

You know if everyone feel that NST done wrong and the garmen let them go then don't buy NST lar

Buy something else like majalah gila gila kah, read news online kar etc

Only way to hurt a paper is to make them lose millions in revenue

Having said that, I feel double standard lah if NST get away with this because no matter how you look at it there is nothing that the picture they publish contribute except maybe to put fuel to a slowly subsiding fire

Maybe NST editors eat too much Danish cookies lah tu, Kjedsen maybe.. and got nothing better to print

too much sugar to the head maybe :)

Well done JALAN RIONG,you guys have just proved that you are macho(spanish for ALL BALLS and No BRAINS).You grabbed the bull by its horns and published it on page 2 again.WOW ! iam impressed.You could have just apologised and say it was an oversight and sack an editor and all would have just cooled down,but noooo,U had to prove what a DUMB PIECE OF DUNG you are.lets see how the ending is.

I apologise for the language. I am tolerant of many things, but not incompetence fueled by misplaced bravado.

The cartoon by NST does mock Islam and the Prophet.

Whatever the outcomes, NST must be punished.

A Muslim by birth AND choice,

Hansac

My opinion is that the NST cartoon does not mock the Prophet. Nowhere is a caricature of the Prophet shown.

The cases concerning Sarawak Tribune and Guang Ming are different.

In the Tribune's case, it printed a caricature of the Prophet alongside a feature. There's no excuse - Islam forbids any drawing of the Prophet.

In Guang Ming's case, it printed an agency photo of a demo. Unfortunately, as I understand it, the photo shows a man carrying a poster of a caricature of the Prophet. Because it was done unintentionally, Guang Ming's evening edition got away with it quite lightly.

In NST's case, there's no caricature. As much as I detest those cartoons that the Danish paper first came out with, I don't think this particular cartoon mocks Islam.

NST is protecting its "rights" to press freedom (or whatever "rights" there are left). I don't see anything wrong with that. Besides I don't expect others like Star to have the guts to speak up for their rights.

Thanks for the giving me the opportunity to express my views.

Dear Jeff,

I have never intended to hijack your blog. No worries. Like many of us here, I felt that those people who lodge a police report against NST is uncalled for.

As mentioned, should freedom of speech be curtailed at the slight provocation of these religious officials? I am of the opinion that NST and also, the rest of the papers did nothing wrong in publishing directly and indirectly those caricature concern.

However, the biggest concern is that whether the govt would act against NST like they did towards Guang Ming and Sarawak Tribune.

Other than that, since when did this blog allow the "f**k " word to be used freely? I thought you do have some form of censorship.

I thought the cartoon is caricaturing the hoo-haa about the recent 'hoo-haa'. It's a caricature about the other caricature.
It's about how some people 'the busker' in this case is willing to do anything for money, and in his case (the busker/street artist) the caricature issue is the flavour of the month.
Where on earth is the insult to Prophet comes into play here?
Are we become too sensitive? Of course Jeff has an axe to grind with NST,MAXIS etc, but that is his free speech. Why the rest of us need to have the same axe? I don't and I am a practising muslim.

somemore dare to say:
"We want to defend the freedom that we crave to report as freely as we can; and Kadir and Ooi have exploited this freedom to the fullest. Glory to them."

Who exploit who now...? I also want to print already...

Can we THINK before we speak, write, draw, print anything?

It is thoughtless and careless of NST to print the cartoon. Not printing it does not mean NST does not promote freedom of expression.

Freedom means the “freedom to do something” for the “good of other people” – that others are not hurt, abused, violated, deprived and condemned.

The cartoon should not be printed because it can be wrongly perceived to
• support the infamous Danish caricatures
• oppose the backlash against the Danish caricatures
• make a negative statement on Islam
• carry a hidden message for Muslims

I have these questions for NST:

1. Why should detractors like Jeff Ooi be worthy of your mention in your defence of the cartoon?
2. Why did you not act with discretion especially after what has happened to Sarawak Tribune and Guang Ming Daily?
3. Why do you not choose to take objective crises management action instead of publishing the emotional piece “What the NST says” dated 22 Feb?
4. Why make it difficult for people like me to defend you?

Aisehman

I commend you for the humility to apologize for your language.

seeevil666

Many thanks for reminding us to be mindful of our language.

Isayman guys,: Aisehman has already apologised for the use or the

Fornication
Under
Consent of
King
Words ,but blame him not coz i too wanted to use those same words when it comes to incompetence fueled by misplaced bravado.
Sekali sekali a jolt like that is needed,no malice intended.

it's just a freakin cartoon . LOL and look into other more important things to fight about .

"We want to defend the freedom that we crave to report"Report what ?Bloody Politician Mouthpiece reporting and u give us crap. kaninama report ,i can take shit ,but bullshit like this is too much.

Doc , u dont get it ! We're just Wagging The Dog.

Pak Lah, If you read this, please do us a favour, please sack Hishammuddin Aun his editors..they disgrace NST's image, you don't need sacrifice lamb working under you, isn't it Pak Lah?

Published this kind of cartoon and blame a good citizen blogger - Jeff Ooi for mocking them is like " Baling Batu Sembunyi Tangan".

Disgrace...Disgrace..Shame on you NST's editors.

wag the dog http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_dog

Nicely put Serpico . However, I do get it...

The NTS comic is mocking the western press and its brand of freedom. Its showing that the press is just waiting to make fun of prophets. It shows the INTENT of the press but not the DEED.

Wah Serpico, so clever your anagram(?)

Btw I don't think it's cool those people wearing that Football Club United Kingdom initials on their T-shirts either. I know it's a fashionable brand but gross and distasteful imho.

My view is that we should express ourselves with dignity and not stoop low ... even when we're really fuming and so very exasperated.

As to the core issue, I'm surprised NST said anything at all. From what I read, I think the bullets were aimed at the govt's seemingly double standards vis-a-vis GuangMing/Borneo

Aisehman,

I am tolerant of many things, but not simply tembak foul-mouthedness which you seem to resort to too often.

Your own blog is your turf, so your business, whatever you choose to do there.

But please do not subject the rest of us to your nonsense elsewhere. Your excuses are lame, even if your strong feelings may be genuine and warranted.

It is shocking to note the NSTs unapologetic reprint of the Wiley Miller (Non Sequitor) cartoon, with the question to readers if they find it offensive. It is akin to reprinting the Jyllands-Posten cartoons, and asking readers if the cartoons are offensive. Wasn't that what the Sarawak Tribune was trying to ask when they reprinted the Jyllands-Posten cartoons?

At least the Sarawak Tribune and Guanming did try to put a stop to the issue, before the government stepped in. What does the NST do? They reprint the Wiley Miller (Non Sequitor) cartoon. Why? Do they think that they can get away with it being some politician's mouthpiece? Unfortunately, they got their foot stuck in their mouthpiece on this issue.

The fact is that people are probably going to react to the Wiley Miller (Non Sequitor) cartoon the same way they are reacting violently to the Jyllands-Posten cartoons, irrespective of whether they have seen it or not.

If Jeff has a hidden agenda behind posting this issue, then I wouldn't be surprised if the NST has one too. It takes two to tango. Besides, the NST speaks of a "vendetta". Why? Did the NST do something to Jeff to provoke this?

If the government is going to penalize newspapers such as the Sarawak Tribune and Guanming over this issue, should they not be consistent with the application of the law? They have to, if they are to look credible in the eyes of the public. More so, being the current chair of the OIC. If not, they should restore the Sarawak Tribune and the Guanming, hand over the chair of the OIC to the next in line, and call it a day.

The whole issue is really getting out of hands. Personally speaking, NST 's act of rebuttal is accrued to rubbing in salt over a sore skin. While anyone is entitled to any form of freedom, there still are boundaries to observe, lest one decides to jump straight into the big ocean and got eaten by most hungry seeking whales/sharks etc... you name it. And that's what NST or anybody else for that matter, is doing. It's so ironic.....talking about double standards.

I come from the BEANO and DANDY era,so i know what a good comic is and do enjoy a good laugh reading the funnies. TO sum it up,Wrong Toon at the Right Place at the Wrong Time.

Leithaisor:

Again my apologies. Yes, you're right, I am at times too foul-mouthed. No excuses.

Aisehman,

It is good that you are man enough to aknowledge and apologise for your error.

Certainly can teach some of our YB's a lesson there!

Aisehman,

I understand your frustration ...i think many thinking malaysian woul dbe frustrated ..NST keeps forgetting how the villified Jeff before on the "Anwar comment" issue ... and never have they ever formally apologised ....they only sensationalised it ...to get Jeff deeper into trouble..

To hell with them now...obvious double standards .... they seem to wanna blame others for stiring up the issue ...i wonder why they didnt write and artciel like this to support guang ming daily?? WHY???? where was the true essence of journalism then ...????

If they can keep quiet then...why no come blaming other for your own stupid bloody mistake!!! arggggggg!!! i feel like hamering somebody to throw my frustration and anger on this whole issue, NST and they wa G handles matters!!!!

Let's not get sidetracked with NST blaming Jeff. Anyone who cares to know what Jeff thinks will come here and read his blog, and they will get the true picture.

NST has hit upon the issue here, "whether the cartoon has trangressed the limits; whether it has crossed the boundaries, and whether it has insulted the Prophet and Islam." To which I answer, NO, to all three questions.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think when NST asks "What are we saying...if we allow people wth personal motives to capitalise on religious and racial sensitivities to victimise others?" they are talking about the idiots like PAS, MAPAN making a big deal out of a small, quite funny cartoon that caricatures the whole situation. Yes, Jeff is mentioned, but he's not the one lodging police reports and getting all heated up. Maybe that's the way to read those "offending" passages, instead of seeing them as attacking Jeff?

Anyway as to Jeff's question, no, NST shouldn't be "subject to a unique set of moral standards". Uniformity is important. However I still firmly believe what was done to Sarawak Tribune was wrong (and Guangming) and our pre-existing "moral standards" are wrong and flawed. If we are calling for heads to roll at NST ONLY because it was done at Sarawak Tribune, then that is wrong. The punishment should fit the crime, in every case. It didn't in ST's case, and it certainly doesn't here.

So sorry guys, I'm with NST on this one. Except for them blaming Jeff of course.

Should the senior editors of The NST be subject to a unique set of moral standard different from those bestowed to the purged editors at the Sarawak Tribune?
No, they should not, and so far I can't see where they are. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that newspaper in Sarawak shut down because it reprinted the Danish cartoons, and not the one currently in the spotlight?

And this from a commenter:
The day the NST decided to support the view that it is not right to publish religiously offensive material was the day the newspaper relinquished the right to publish stuff such as the cartoon now in question.
The Danish cartoons were blatantly offensive. The Non Sequitur cartoon is not. Yes, some Muslims have been offended, but good luck printing anything these days without offending at least some Muslims. The Danish cartoons were immediately and unjustifiably offensive; the NST cartoon, in my opinion, would be offensive only to those who have either read too much into it, completely misunderstood it, or both.
The cartoon that appeared in the NST was obviously meant to make fun of the whole cartoon fiasco itself, not the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and to make people think, to make people reflect on the utter stupidity and absurdity of the reactions the Danish cartoons (themselves utterly stupid and absurd) have provoked. It's sad that this isn't obvious to some Muslims, and sad that you, Jeff, seem to be setting reason aside in order to take a jab at your arch-enemies. This is not a case of whistle-blowing, it's a case of barking up the wrong tree.

I'm with Jordan here and I fully agree with your opinion that Jeff with his long term 'issues' with NST chose NOT to understand the Non-sequitur cartoon.

PAS and all the other silly NGOs, I fully expect them to behave like they did.

Offensive or not.

You all have been pwned by the great political-media complex.

I'm with the NST on this.

hann: mGf -- we crossed path agan, and I salute thee for thy views, and I think I find echoes of them in my mind. May I borrow them for use at Desi's?

(Jeff: minta maaf if I am seen to be using your platform to reach a fellow CONversationist...Thanks.)

Agree with Jordan on this one.

I am in full agreement with hann and Jordan.

BTW have Jeff been ZAMMED! Since when are we even forbidden to write/display the muslim name of Muhammad?

Jordan's got you there, Jeff. And he's a bigger Muslim than I'll ever be, and I stand by him.

jordan and usman:
I'm completely with you on this. I fear some "evil" forces will explout this NST dilemma and put their daggers in - as like "borrowing somebody's dagger to kill another...". Thinking allowed: Will Brendan Pereira suffer a Melanyi's fate? Remember Jeff's pose: ZAMMED?

hann- still hoping to hear from thee?

//hann: mGf -- we crossed path agan, and I salute thee for thy views, and I think I find echoes of them in my mind. May I borrow them for use at Desi's?//

Sure go ahead :) What's mGf? And what's with the "thee's" and "thy's"?

hann and jordan make sense.

jeff, you've done a great job at exposing wrongdoings, but this is not one of your shining moments.

sun and mkini's editorials put it in the right perspective. Mkini's stand is especially exemplary, and big, having been targetted by nst before.

sun editorial http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=13118

mkini editorial http://www.malaysiakini.com/editorials/47396