From: Jon F to  Backlash (See also Response from Jon F who also reports the abuse of human rights)

I posed 3 Freedom of Information questions in my response to the Home Office consultation paper. Obviously, I've not received a reply within the required period. I'm not surprised - because I don't think the Home Office has any interest in the views of the private individual. But, that's why I posed 3 Freedom of Informationrequests - to demonstrate that they DON'T read responses to consultation material !

This is another critical factor in the case to be presented to the European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg).

Here is the letter I have today issued to the Information Commissioner: -

Dear Sir/Madam,

Freedom of Information
Consultation on Possession of Extreme Pornography

On 14 November 2005 I issued a Freedom of Information (FoI) request to the Home Office as part of my investigation into, and response to, the consultation process on the possession of extreme pornography.

I inserted a freedom of information request for two reasons – one of them to establish whether the Home Office actually reads responses from the private citizen.

I submitted a particularly detailed paper which seriously undermined the Home Office proposals outlined in the consultation paper. My paper supported the legislation approved by all European Union states - encompassed within UK legislation in the HRA 1998. My FoI questions sought to tease out elements in the incompatibility between the HRA and the proposals outlined in the consultation process.

The Home Office initially acknowledged my response. Then the Minister (Paul Goggins) wrote to an MP on 20 December, who forwarded me his letter, providing a very brief outline of his approach following the consultation process. This response demonstrated to me that he had little understanding of the complexity of the issues I had raised within the consultation period. I was convinced that the Home Office had not read my paper. I fear that the Home Office may have concluded its approach to the consultation process without examining the detailed reasons why those, opposed to the legislation proposed, held the views they do.

This issue goes to the core of the purpose of your organisation.

I have been patient, I do not wish to overly embarrass the Home Office, but I wrote in detail on 14 November, posing my questions, and on 29 January, I sent a reminder to Mr Goggins. It is expensive photocopying lengthy documents, so I summarise here the questions posed in my paper of 14 November: -

3. Freedom of Information Requests.

3.1 Request for information which demonstrates that a request has been issued to a foreign government to investigate an alleged sexual assault or rape.

3.2 An attempt has been made to find on the Internet an example of a real time rape video which appears to be a genuine rape. It may be that Home Office staff have devoted some time to this and have found some material. No money was spent on pornographic sites during the research undertaken in support of this response, which may explain why the writer has been unable to find a convincing example of a real rape. There is therefore some concern in case the Home Office has claimed material exists which doesn’t (for some years an “urban myth” was in circulation of the existence of “snuff videos”).

3.3 Given that the consultation paper suggests that virtually all such sites are based abroad, it seems reasonable to expect that, if such a site had been found, and the Home Office had reasonable grounds to suspect that a real rape had occurred, the Home Office would have asked a foreign government to investigate. Please would you let me have a copy of any letter to a foreign government which demonstrates that you have asked it to investigate an allegation of rape?

3.4 Request for any legal advice which confirms that the possession of consensual sado-masochistic violent sex can successfully be prosecuted and that Article 8 does not apply.

3.5 It seems extremely unlikely that violent sado-masochistic sex, which is consensual, and which is not life threatening, can be deemed to be criminal (See: 9.1, 9.3 & 9.4 below: Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000: definition). Furthermore, it seems unlikely that the possession of real images depicting such acts could also be criminalised – because of the provisions of Article 8 of the Convention. I would therefore like to see any legal advice you have received with regard to this specific category of material.

3.6 Request for sight of any research which demonstrates that children may be more harmed by access to explicit Internet based material, that is: material more explicit than that which is permissible within the R18 category (for example “fisting”).

3.7 Would you please direct me to or show me any research you have which demonstrates that children may be more harmed by viewing extreme material on the Internet than by seeing R18 material? Or harmed at all by any such material? (There is a belief that if any harm does occur it may be due to expressions of adult assumed abhorrence.)

3.8 For your convenience I also provide notice of my intention to make a further FoI request in 6 months time (see paragraph 5.18 below).

I ask that you seek a response from the Home Office to these FoI requests, that you investigate the reasons for the delay in replying, and you also press your obligations to the full - to establish whether the Home Office actually reads responses received to consultation papers.

While I expect little sympathy from your office to the underlying theme of my response (the right of consenting adults to enjoy bizarre sex in private), I do ask that you recognise that Government Departments must read responses to consultation papers. An objective observer will, of course, recognise that this has huge implications for issues of mass interest.

From Games Industry.biz

Utah representative David Hogue's controversial violent videogames bill, which tags videogames onto existing obscenity laws relating to pornography, has sailed through the House of Representatives by a vote of 56-8.

Hogue remains confident that his bill will withstand a court challenge, in spite of various similar legislative proposals being rejected on the grounds of constitutionality, First Amendment legal experts having already weighed in on the Utah bill, stating that it likely violates the First Amendment protection of free expression.

Representative Hogue's proposal, which will make it a felony to promote or sell 'inappropriately violent' videogames to minors, failed its initial vote at the House Committee in January. It was finally approved by a vote of 7-2 a little over a month later.

The Republican has rekindled thoughts of various school shooting incidents, including Columbine, suggesting that violent videogames played a significant role and stating his objections to Rockstar's much publicised Bully game for the PS2.

Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos? Maybe not, Hogue stated in the Salt Lake City Tribune.

The bill is not law yet however, and the next step will be to advance to the State Senate. The Entertainment Software Association, which has successfully halted various similar proposals in other US States, largely on the grounds of vague definitions and unconstitutional breaches of First Amendment freedom of expression laws, has already voiced its objection to the Utah bill, and is highly likely to officially contest its implementation into law.

Thanks to Nick

You might be interested to hear that AOL is sponsoring the Internet Watch Foundation to send publicity materials to UK libraries, encouraging library staff & IT professionals to inform on unpleasant internet content.

Interestingly, the letter includes "criminally obscene content hosted in the UK", elaborated on in their leaflet as "images featuring acts of 'extreme' sexual activity".

Is it just me, or are we heading towards a legislative stitch-up on "extreme" porn thanks to an unholy alliance of IWF, AOL, John Beyer & Mr Blair.

Most librarians probably regard the Cadburys flake advert as extreme porn.

From the Yemen Observer

A documentary film of the female Yemeni prisoner, Amina, has been banned by the Yemen Ministry of Culture.

The film, which was produced and directed by Khadeja Al-Salami, tells the story of the famous female prisoner Amina Al-Tohaif, who is accused of killing her husband.

The Ministry claimed that the film should not be shown as it would harm the reputation of Yemen. The censorship department also sent a copy to the Political Security department. They then called on the director and administration of the Central Jail - where Amina has been held for two years - criticizing them for allowing the filming to take place.

Khadeja Al-Salami said she was shocked that the Ministry of Culture should take the decision to ban it. She said that while she knew foreign films were often censored, all the events and scene on her film were set and shot in Yemen.

She said she was especially surprised by the ministry’s decisions as the Yemeni Culture Center had already agreed to show the film. She expressed her great regret that people in Yemen would not be able to watch the film, but said that the film would still be shown in abroad via satellite channels. Al-Salami said that such acts “shake the citizen’s trust” in the local media, and would encourage them to look outside for news about the country.

She denied claims that the film contained anything that would harm the reputation of Yemen, arguing indeed that it did exactly the opposite. She pointed out that the film discusses both the positive and negative aspects of the situation of women in Yemen, tackling the education system, upbringing and expected behavior of Yemeni woman, which in turn determines its future.

Al-Saloami expressed her regret that people in charge of culture in Yemen think with what she called ‘rotten mentalities’. She said that they were supposed to allow for opportunities to discuss issues looking at both the positive and negative sides, rather than do the thinking for others and put blocks on citizens’ minds.

From the BBC

Muslims must accept that freedom of speech is central to Britishness and should be preserved even if it offends people, says Sir Trevor Phillips.

The chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) said we should allow people to offend each other.  And he suggested that Muslims who wanted a system of Islamic Shariah law should leave the UK.

His comments follow angry protests against cartoons satirising the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

Phillips told ITV1's Jonathan Dimbleby programme: What some minorities have to accept is that there are certain central things we all agree about, which are about the way we treat each other. That we have an attachment to democracy, that we sort things out by voting not by violence and intimidation, that we tolerate things that we don't like.

And that commitment to freedom of expression should also allow Muslim preachers to make comments about homosexuality that are offensive to broad segments of the British population, he said: One point of Britishness is that people can say what they like about the way we should live, however absurd, however unpopular it is.

He also rejected the idea of Shariah law in Muslim communities in the UK. We have one set of laws. They are decided on by one group of people, members of Parliament, and that's the end of the story. Anybody who lives here has to accept that's the way we do it. If you want to have laws decided in another way, you have to live somewhere else.

From Sun Star

Philippines media yesterday rallied behind The Daily Tribune, which was the subject of the “first attack” against freedom of the press after President Arroyo put the country under a state of emergency.

Police raided The Daily Tribune office in Port Area, Manila, past midnight Saturday and seized several copies of its Saturday issue that were about to be dispatched nationwide. PNP Director General Arturo Lomibao said that under General Order Number 5 issued in relation to Presidential Proclamation 1017, the PNP has a clear mandate to carry out appropriate action and security measures to prevent an escalation of the situation.”

Aside from The Daily Tribune’s office, Criminal Investigation and Detection Group operatives also attempted to raid the office of Abante, a tabloid, also in Port Area, Manila, and offices of Malaya but the policemen withdrew when they noticed several crew of two television stations in the area.

Niñez Cacho Olivares, publisher of The Daily Tribune, decried the act saying that the police conducted the raid without a warrant. She also said they will file a case: What’s this martial law? Does the state of national emergency allow the policemen of (President) Arroyo to just confiscate anything they please?

Marites Danguilan-Vitug, editor of Newsbreak Magazine, feared that they might suffer the same fate that The Daily Tribune had experienced: We view the raid on Tribune, an opposition newspaper, with alarm. It appears to signal the start of a crackdown on media organizations. We have always believed that repression is never the answer to a critical press. Vitug reminded authorities that a free press is a cornerstone of a democracy and without it, “we cannot claim to be a democratic country.”

Vergel Santos of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) likened the incident that happened to The Daily Tribune to the early days of martial rule. Santos said media organizations should band together and oppose the proclamation or any attempt that would curb the freedom of the press.

Also, the National Union of Journalists in the Philippines (NUJP) said it is about time that journalists must take a stand regarding the issue. Carlos Conde of NUJP feared that the situation might worsen had not media would not take any stand on the matter: This is going to get worse. We are worried and concerned about the implications of this proclamation on press freedom.

The five daily newspapers in Cebu yesterday also said the government cannot censor the media as proclamation of a state of emergency does not suspend the constitutional right to freedom of expression. Proclamation 1017, which put the country under a state of emergency, said that certain sectors of the media are “recklessly” promoting the cause of those who want to bring down the Arroyo administration.

From the Salt Lake Tribune

The Utah House voted overwhelmingly  to yank violent video games out of the hands of minors and punish as felons adults, including parents, who provide such entertainment to children.

Republican David Hogue implied such games played a serious role in school shootings such as Columbine: Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos? Maybe not.

Bill HB257 would add extremely violent "interactive video or electronic" games to the state's statute protecting minors from harmful material; the statute is commonly used to prosecute those who provide pornography to children.

Hogue mentioned such games as Resident Evil 4 and Grand Theft Auto. But to violate the terms of the legislation, a violent video game would have to be "patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community" and lack any serious "literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors."

Republican Scott Wyatt said such a tough standard means only the most depraved video games would fall under this bill.

A few lawmakers, including Orem Republican Margaret Dayton and Salt Lake City Democrat Ross Romero, questioned HB257's constitutionality. Dayton said the bill was "frustrating." She dislikes such video games but said violence has certain constitutional protections that pornography does not have: That's why we can have pictures in the Bible, battle scenes or war movies.

Romero also didn't like the fact the bill could land a parent in jail for two weeks, if they buy an extremely violent video game for their child.

The bill now goes to the Senate.

From Adam McConnel on Media Channel

I haven't seen the film, but from what I understand, the Gary Busey character has been interpreted as anti-Semitic, but the character may or may not be obviously so. The interpretation of the film also depends a lot on how knowledgeable one is about events in Iraq during the past three years; for that reason, Americans are likely to be upset about the film because they don't know that much of what is in the film is, unfortunately, taken directly from reality. For example, how many wedding parties (in the region guns are shot off as a part of the celebration and so have been 'mistaken' by the Americans as 'enemy fire' on a number of occasions, with high numbers of dead and wounded) have the Americans bombed in the past 5 years in both Afghanistan and Iraq? The number is higher than one might think.

There is also the problem that this film does to Americans what American films have doing to Muslims (or Turks or Arabs) for, well, 80 years, that is it stereotypes and denigrates them. Two wrongs don't make a right, but Americans need to bear that in mind. . .

From The Telegraph

A virulently anti-Semitic film about the Iraq war has provoked a storm of protest in Germany after it sold out to cheering audiences from the country's 2.5 million-strong Turkish community.

Valley of the Wolves, by the Turkish director Serdan Akar, shows crazed American GIs massacring innocent guests at a wedding party and scenes in which a Jewish surgeon removes organs from Iraqi prisoners in a style reminiscent of the Nazi death camp doctor Joseph Mengele.

Bavaria's interior minister admitted last week that he had dispatched intelligence service agents to cinemas showing the film to "gauge" audience reaction and identify potential radicals. Edmund Stoiber, the state's conservative prime minister, has appealed to cinema operators to remove what he described as "this racist and anti-Western hate film" from their programmes.

The £6 million film, the most expensive Turkish production ever made, had already proved a box office hit in Turkey, where it first opened last month at a gala attended by the wife of the country's prime minister.

The production went on general release in Germany a fortnight ago and has had full houses ever since. More than 130,000 people, most of them young Muslims, saw the film in the first five days of its opening. At a packed cinema in a largely Turkish immigrant district of Berlin last week, Valley of the Wolves was being watched almost exclusively by young Turkish men. They clapped furiously when the Turkish hero of the film was shown blowing up a building occupied by the United States military commander in northern Iraq.

In the closing sequence, the hero is shown plunging a dagger into the heart of a US commander called Sam, played by Billy Zane. The audience responded by standing up and chanting "Allah is great!"

The nature of the film and the enthusiastic reception given to it by young Muslims, has both shocked and polarised politicians and community leaders. Bernd Neumann, the culture minister in Chancellor Angela Merkel's government complained last week that the reaction to the film raises serious questions about the values of our society and our ability to instil them.

Kenan Kolat, the head of Germany's Turkish community, insisted that a ban on the film would make matters worse. If it is withdrawn, it will raise levels of identification with the film. A democracy must be able to endure films that it doesn't approve of.

But those arguing for a ban on Valley of the Wolves appeared to have won a partial victory last week when Cinemaxx, one of Germany's largest cinema chains, announced that it was withdrawing the film.



 

The religions of the world have come up with an impossibly contradictory tangle of myths intended to unify communities into controllable and socially powerful groups. When the myths simply become too far divorced from any evidence of reality whatsoever, then they have to be enforced by intimidation and punishment. Perhaps though there is one myth that unifies all of mankind's religions, and that's the story of the King's Clothes.

From the National Secular Society

Belgian Islamists staged a march through Brussels on Tuesday, demanding that the European Commission institute a Europe-wide blasphemy law. The marchers delivered a letter of protest about the cartoons to the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Danish Embassy. The president of the Union of Brussels and Neighbourhood Mosques said: We oppose the widening chasm between the Muslim community and other European citizens that has incited hatred and fear of Islam, due to these irresponsible acts [the publication of the satirical cartoons].

In their letter to the European Commission and the European Parliament, the Islamists warn that the wave of irresponsible humiliation caused by the cartoons may be dangerous:This attitude can only exacerbate conflict, fuel hatred and reinforce the logic of the clash of civilisations

The letter asks for the European Union’s top decision-makers to act determinedly to prepare a draft law that forbids every kind of blasphemy, so that all groups in society can leave in peace and harmony. Such a law would:  be completely consistent with the EU’s protection of freedom, human rights and sacredness, and the elimination of all acts that lead to racism and xenophobia

EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana signalled this week that the EU might be supportive of this idea, stating: We are working on some ideas. I cannot be very precise, but we are working on some ideas that maybe it is possible to get through, according to Reuters. Deutsche Welle quotes Solana’s spokeswoman Cristina Gallach as saying They want mechanisms to guarantee this is not repeated and we should be able to find it in UN conventions on human rights.

Meanwhile, an Iranian government minister has demanded that the European Union ban the publication of caricatures that satirise “holy figures” of any religion, including the allegedly offensive Prophet Muhammad cartoons, Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Motaki told a news conference in Yerevan on Tuesday: Today I will hold negotiations over the phone with the foreign minister of Austria, which currently holds the EU presidency. During the conversation, I will suggest including the issue of respect for all prophets of any religions in the EU agenda.

East Asian Muslim and Christian leaders wrapped up their two-day meeting in the Indonesian capital Jakarta by urging the UN to make a “universal declaration” strictly banning blasphemy. Din Syamsuddin, leader of Indonesia’s second largest Muslim organisation, the Muhammadiyah, said I personally agree that the UN should issue a universal declaration of human responsibility, apart from the universal declaration of human rights, Because having the freedom without responsibility could lead our civilisation to absolute liberalism.

Extremist cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi has added his influential voice to the pressure on the United Nations to adopt a resolution banning blasphemy to head off similar incidents in the future. He also urged the European Union to criminalise blasphemy against any religion, including pagan religions.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is pressing for a ban on religious intolerance to be part of the “bedrock” of a planned new United Nations human rights body. According to the text of an OIC proposal, the new UN body should state clearly that the defamation of religions and prophets is inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression and that states, organizations and the media have a responsibility in promoting tolerance and respect for religious and cultural values.

See www.RadioListings.co.uk for more on the episodes of the Goons.

There is also a mention on the BBC 7 Comedy Message Boards about this and cartoon  censorship in a thread entitled: Should BBC7 pull any mention of Muhammad. There is also a management reply in The Lounge in a thread entitled: Ofcom Regulations

Thanks to Frank

The Daily Telegraph report was (following the comments of BBC7 Head - Mary Kalemkarian on BBC4 'Feedback') misleading...

The 'African Queen' was a boat, played by the announcer Douglas Smith - with cocoa on his face (ie to be read also as an African gay queen..) containing Kenneth Williams as Gaylord Ffitch and Kenneth Horne (a keen Botanist..) - both uncocoa'd - going up the Umpopo to visit the 400 year old 'She' - a whitey Queen played by Betty Marsden - reaching shore there was a 6 second burst of "Da Camptdown Races"...quickly terminated with Kenneth Horne with a 'that's enough of that'.

Slightly off topic news included to highlight the contradiction with sex related TV channels where adverts continually suggest stronger material than we ever get to see. The ASA presumably think it's ok for sex customers to be misled.

Based on an article from ign.com

In a decision that may have wide-ranging implications for the way videogames are advertised,  the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), has ruled that Activision's advertisements for its Call of Duty games are "misleading" and ordered them never to be shown in their present form again.

The complaint centered around the television advertising for Activision's Call of Duty 2. According to the complaining parties, Activision's advertising was misleading because the graphics used in the [advertisement] were superior to that of the game itself.

The subsequent investigation by the ASA revealed that the Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) -- a group responsible for the pre-transmission examination and clearance of television advertisements in the UK -- believed that the graphics in the advertisements were "scenes taken from the games themselves." It was only after contacting Activision itself to ask about the complaints that it was discovered that the graphics were "computer-generated scenes...produced solely for the ads."

According to the ASA, this revelation "immediately made the ads unacceptable for broadcast" because the ads did not reflect the quality of the actual graphics which would be present in the games themselves. The ASA ruled that because the ads were misleading, they could no longer be shown in their present form.

Activision attempted to counter the ASA ruling by stating that such use of pre-rendered footage represented a "common industry practice" and that the company had acted in "good faith." The ASA rejected this argument on the grounds that it was an "insufficient" defense of the advertisements.

For overseas readers, the Evening Standard and Daily Mail are right wing papers that pander to intolerance and bigotry. Ken Livingstone's colourful views about them are more than justified.

Based on an article from The Independent

The London Mayor Ken Livingstone has been suspended for four weeks after being found guilty of bringing his office into disrepute by comparing a Jewish reporter to a concentration camp guard. A disciplinary tribunal said he had been "unnecessarily insensitive and offensive" when approached by a journalist from London's Evening Standard after a party at City Hall last February.

The Mayor will be suspended on full pay for four weeks starting on 1 March. He will not be permitted to work for the Greater London Authority from its headquarters at City Hall or his Brent home and his duties will be carried out by the deputy mayor, Nicky Gavron. Since he lost the case he must pay his own costs, estimated at £80,000.

His treatment of the journalist was unnecessarily insensitive and offensive, said David Laverick, chairman of the adjudication panel, which took up the case after it was referred by the Standards Board for England, the local government watchdog. He persisted with a line of comment likening the journalist's job to a concentration camp guard, despite being told that the journalist was Jewish and found it offensive to be asked if he was a German war criminal.

Livingstone issued a statement condemning the ruling. This decision strikes at the heart of democracy. Elected politicians should only be able to be removed by the voters or for breaking the law. Three members of a body that no one has elected should not be allowed to overturn the votes of millions of Londoners. He signalled that he would decide next week whether to mount a legal challenge.

During the hearing, Livingstone sought to defend himself against charges that he had damaged the reputation of the mayor's office by claiming he was acting in a private capacity on the night of the incident.

The controversy began when Livingstone was approached by a Evening Standard (associated with the Daily Mail) reporter, Oliver Finegold, as he left a party at City Hall on 8 February. After aggressive and repeated hassle for a comment, Livingstone unsurprisingly retorted on the possibility that the reporter had been a "German war criminal"

The story first appeared on another newspaper's website and, after the Mayor refused to apologise, the matter was referred to the tribunal following a complaint by the Jewish Board of Deputies. Earlier this month, a report by the Community Security Trust, which advises Britain's Jews on security, said the comments were to blame for 11 anti-Semitic attacks in London and the South-east last year.

It is unlikely that Livingstone will face any further charges as a result of the ruling. Although there is a public order offence of using threatening or abusive language, the six-month period to bring charges in this case has elapsed.

'You're just like a concentration camp guard, doing it because you're paid'

This is a transcript of the taped exchange between Ken Livingstone and Oliver Finegold which led to the Mayor of London being suspended from office yesterday. Livingstone was leaving a reception at City Hall in February last year when approached by the reporter.

Oliver Finegold: Mr Livingstone, Evening Standard. How did it ...
Ken Livingstone: Oh, how awful for you.
OF: How did tonight go?
KL: Have you thought of having treatment?
OF: How did tonight go?
KL: Have you thought of having treatment?
OF: Was it a good party? What does it mean for you?
KL: What did you do before? Were you a German war criminal?
OF: No, I'm Jewish. I wasn't a German war criminal.
KL: Ah ... right.
OF: I'm actually quite offended by that. So, how did tonight go?
KL: Well you might be, but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard. You're just doing it 'cause you're paid to, aren't you?
OF: Great. I've you on record for that. So how did tonight go?
KL: It's nothing to do with you because your paper is a load of scumbags.
OF: How did tonight go?
KL: It's reactionary bigots ...
OF: I'm a journalist. I'm doing my job.
KL: ... and who supported fascism.
OF: I'm only asking for a simple comment. I'm only asking for a comment.
KL: Well, work for a paper that isn't ...
OF: I'm only asking for a comment.
KL:  ... that had a record of supporting fascism.
OF: You've accused me ...

From ZD Net

This year's ISPA Internet Villain is the UK government. The UK government walked off with the title of Internet Villain of the year for pushing for tougher data retention laws in Europe.

The award was presented at the ISPAs, the annual awards evening organised by the Internet Service Providers Association (ISPA).

During its presidency of the European Commission last year, the UK government drove forward the data retention directive. It forces ISPs and fixed-line and mobile operators to keep details of their customers' communications for up to two years.

The other nominees for the award were:

• European Commissioner Reding "for the revision of the TV without Frontiers Directive which threatens ISPs by extending the scope of broadcasting regulation to content delivered via the Internet, in a market which is not yet fully developed."
• The European Commission "for its inability to get through one year without producing yet another piece of intellectual-property Legislation."
• Russia "for failing to deal with illegal Web sites and online abuse hosted within its borders".
• Sony BMG "for compromising the security of its customers’ PCs with its copyright-protecting rootkit technology"

Sony's actions sparked calls for a boycott of the company last year, but it's understood that the judges were swayed by the massive costs that ISPs could face in order to comply with the data retention directive.

It seems a world truism that wherever one finds intolerance of sexual trivia, then thuggery, torture, bombs, violence and intimidation are never far away.

From Contact Music

Pop star Janet Jackson's notorious "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl will cost US TV bosses $550,000 (GBP315,000) in censorship fines, after they lost an appeal to overturn the fine.

Authorities have picked on CBS for broadcasting the blunder and upheld the previously-imposed punishment.

Jackson inadvertently exposed her breast while on stage with Justin Timberlake at the half-time show.

Based on an article from the Sydney Morning Herald

Rocking in a pink swing fashioned from the cab of a pedal-driven rickshaw, Agus Suwage felt at peace. He had just installed his Pinkswing Park exhibit at Jakarta's international biennale and was surrounded by massive panels with multiple pictures of a near-naked man and woman frolicking in a utopian park - a world away from thoughts of religious furore, public condemnation and possible imprisonment.

Within days of November's exhibition launch, Islamic fundamentalists had shoved Suwage to the forefront of their struggle to redefine Indonesia by descending on the biennale, forcing its closure and demanding prosecutions. At first police claimed his work blasphemed the story of Adam and Eve, then last week they told Suwage he faced five years in jail for producing pornography.

The same groups staging violent demonstrations against the West over cartoons of the prophet Muhammad are targeting pornography in their battle to transform Indonesia into a strict Islamic nation. And they are winning: parliament is set to introduce a sweeping anti-pornography law. Expected to be passed by June, the law imposes a rigid social template; couples who kiss in public will face up to five years' jail, as would anyone flaunting a "sensual body part" - including their navel - and tight clothing will be outlawed.

Most women's groups are horrified, entertainment industries believe it could destroy them and Bali's embattled tourism authorities are alarmed at the prospect of sunbathing tourists being arrested.

Plans to introduce Playboy's soft porn to the Indonesian market next month have become another focus of rowdy demonstrations, with protesters portraying the magazine as a symbol of the decadent West's attack on Islam. Playboy's publishers are proposing a bizarre compromise, no naked women will be featured - Indonesians, at least, will be able to say they only buy it for the articles.

In Jakarta, police have seized hundreds of thousands of "erotic" magazines - including FHM and Rolling Stone - and DVDs, after an edict from police chief Sutanto to "eradicate pornography".

The Islamic Defenders Front spearheads the anti-porn protests. Its leader, is Habib Riziek. Porn, including artworks such as Suwage's, contributes to moral delinquency, Riziek claims. We don't care about the technicality of the picture. What we care is that the picture is publicly exhibited and it is pornography and it would damage morals. Riziek remains emphatic the bill is essential to "guard the nation's morality" against pornography, which extends past explicit photographs to "anything that could arouse sexual desire".

Suwage is increasingly bitter about the gallery's curator, Supangkat's, reaction to the protest. After hundreds of demonstrators arrived at the exhibition, a panicked Supangkat ordered the offending panels to be covered with white cloth. Other artists draped their own works in solidarity and Supangkat closed the biennale, permanently. Suwage believes his prosecution is linked to pressure to pass the anti-porn law and the desire of fundamentalists to impose Islamic rule on Indonesia. Suwage, who is afraid of prison, says he is determined to fight.

In Bali, the head of the government's tourism authority, Gede Nurjaya is concerned prohibitions against kissing and revealing bodies could be imposed against foreigners, destroying Bali's faltering tourism industry.

Arriva says most women's groups oppose the bill. Most of it restricts women, what they wear, how they act. It even creates a board that would go around monitoring women's behaviour. She sees the anti-porn movement as part of an agenda to reshape Indonesia, with pornography a symbol of Western culture to the many Muslims who believe globalisation aims to destroy their culture.

Adrian Vickers, Professor of Asian Studies at the University of Wollongong, agrees the debate is part of whipping up a moral panic about Western decadence eroding Indonesian culture and morality, with the potential to push Indonesia towards an Islamic state.

By my calculations the Jerry Springer version of Christ is just as likely to be the truth as the multitude of church versions. Which in turn is equally likely to be the truth as a prophet from God wearing a turban bomb and indeed, equally likely as a prophet from God wearing any other sort of headwear.

From Christian Today

Protestors gathered in Yorkshire earlier this week, regarding the controversial stage show Jerry Springer – The Opera. As part of a national tour, the show is at the York Grand Opera House every night this week, and will visit the Bradford Alhambra in May as its only other Yorkshire date.

Major Paul Westlake, of York Branch of the Salvation Army, said: We are here to put across to people that they should not formulate any ideas about Jesus Christ from this production they are going to see. In the production, he is portrayed as a ridiculous figure who says he may be a little bit gay. The issue is that there is a lot in the show that is offensive to Christians. In this country we seem to be able to poke fun at Christianity but not other minority faiths.

Lizzie Richards, general manager of the Grand Opera House, said: It's up to them if they want to protest. They are perfectly entitled to say how they feel. We are trying to offer a balanced programme. We think it is a great show from great producers written by two very talented people in Stewart Lee and Richard Thomas, which is why we wanted it to come to York.

From the BBC

Chinese Communist Party bosses are as determined as ever to maintain control over every word published or broadcast in the world's most populous country. A media clampdown - the latest of many over the years - has seen a string of journalists disciplined, dismissed or even jailed for violating official guidelines.

Some of the campaign's targets, however, are refusing to be silenced. And they have found plenty of supporters - some in unlikely quarters - willing to speak up on their behalf.

There is now an unstoppable wave of demands for more freedom of expression and resistance to the old propaganda policies, said Jiao Guobiao, who was forced to resign his post as a journalism professor last year after accusing the government of handling the press in a manner worthy of Nazi Germany.

Far more embarrassing, not to say ominous, has been the chorus of domestic protest over the closure in late January of Bing Dian (Freezing Point), a weekly publication noted for its cutting-edge reporting on sensitive topics.

Unlike most journalists punished in the past, the two editors loudly disputed the move to censor them. In comments widely aired on the internet they called it an "illegal abuse of power" aimed at preventing the growth of a civil society.

In an apparent climb-down, it was later announced that the magazine would reopen on March 1, but without its two chief editors. The reopened magazine would be an empty shell of its previous self, they said, and had been ordered to print a full rebuttal of the article on historical censorship which triggered the closure.

Among those who have rallied behind the editors are a group of former senior Party and media officials, including Mao Zedong's secretary and a former Editor in Chief of the People's Daily. The Taiwanese-born columnist Lung Ying-tai, whose controversial articles for Bing Dian may have been the real reason for the closure, has sent an open letter of protest to President Hu Jintao.

She believes the move against the influential magazine was a calculated one made by the president himself. His power base lies in the Communist Party Youth League, whose newspaper, China Youth Daily, publishes Bing Dian as a weekly supplement.

The decision to reopen the supplement was an attempt to ease the anger about the closure, she told the BBC: Freezing out the two prominent and courageous editors, she added, was designed to warn all other journalists to behave.

Propaganda officials have also faced other public challenges to their authority, including a rare strike by reporters in support of three editors dismissed from a leading daily, the Beijing News, late last year.

But what really worries them is that those now pushing for a lifting of censorship include not just journalists and activists, but also people in business, government and law who believe media reform is a necessary part of China's modernisation.

It is not good for the Communist Party to keep to its old ways, said Jiang He, who runs a hi-tech company in the western city of Chongqing.  China's rapid economic growth is proving a strong force for change, he said, pointing out that the media was already far more open in many ways than in the past. It's such an information age. There's no way anyone can block everything, he said.

Thanks to David:

Everyone should read this:

http://www.kenanmalik.com/essays/islamophobia_prospect.html

It's a Muslim investigative journalist's essay about how politicians on all sides manipulate perceptions of cultural differences, and where the real problems lie. There's some good warnings about censorship too. It's simultaneously reassuring and disturbing stuff.

Most of the stuff relevant to Melon farmers is down in the latter third, or thereabouts

From The Nation

A senator representing Thailand's northeastern Nakhon Ratchasima Province on Tuesday alleged that government agencies are blocking local residents from political information by forcing cable TV providers to cancel their services despite having subscriptions.

Such acts will only drive more people to join the upcoming rally against the prime minister, warned the senator, Pichet Pattanachoti.

Pichet said residents of Chumpuang District and surrounding areas had complained that government officials forced their cable TV providers to disconnect their services to prevent them from seeing the news, as the opposition against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has grown with democratic activists planning the massive rally against him on February 26.

Villagers were told by their cable TV providers that they have been ordered to disconnect the services by government officials, police and district chiefs, he said: Doing this will push more people to rally to oust the prime minister.

From the forum at Thai Visa

Presumably they are blocking The Nation, ASTV channels (1-6) and a few others that "dare" to criticize this government. There may be other Thai channels doing this as well that I'm not aware of.

We've been lucky none of them have been removed from our service as I thought would happen eventually...

Spoke to soon!
Tonight's ASTV 1 presentation of a demonstration down South was temporarily replaced by a different channel.

Based on an article from The Telegraph

A teenager who used "fuck" while chatting with friends in a park has been handed an £80 fine by a police officer for anti-social behaviour.

Kurt Walker, 18, a student and volunteer youth centre worker, is refusing to pay the fine, saying that the use of the word in a private conversation was normal among his peer group and did not constitute an offence.

Walker said yesterday that he was not given a chance to explain when the woman officer approached him in a park in Dover, Kent, and handed him the fixed penalty notice fine. He said the incident happened as he was walking through the park on his way to the youth centre, when he came across a group of his friends. One of my mates asked: 'What have you been up to?' And when I replied, I used a swear word. But I was shocked when the police officer gave me the fine. She just slapped on the fine and then left. I walked off up the street furious. It's my right to swear in a private conversation. In my eyes I have not committed any crime whatsoever. There's no way I'm going to pay the fine. I'm going to take it to court and argue my case.

The fixed penalty notice was abusively issued under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 and the decision to issue it has been welcomed by some campaigners in the town.

A spokesman for Kent Police said: "Swearing is an offence under the Public Order Act." [Well Fuck You!]

The world's religions are doing a fine job in demonstrating their intolerance and their affinity for intimidation. It seems also that the threats of violence will surely lead to some restrictions on criticism via humour or insult.

Maybe the next time your mum/dad/friend trundles off to church, rather than saying: that's nice, why not try instead: it's nice that you are doing your bit to further the causes of intolerance and intimidation. And by the way, what is the probability that your belief is the correct one?

Based on articles from South Manchester Reporter & India West

One of Manchester's Hindu leaders has slammed an advertisement depicting Goddess Durga clasping eight bottles of Southern Comfort.

The image, used in adverts in bars throughout Europe, has predictably outraged both moderate and strict Hindus. They have accused the licensing trade of ridiculing one of their most revered gods and of hijacking their religion to boost profits.

Ashit Sinha, a community worker and former journalist, says the advert should be banned. And he is calling on the media to institute an international regulatory body that would stop newspapers, magazines and advertisers lampooning religions and gods.

Sinha  continued: This is not just a Muslim problem. I don't know whether it's a lack of awareness and knowledge or complete lack of morality in the whole community. I think there needs to be an international regulatory body to monitor and where necessary, censor, the publication of religious images to stop this kind of thing happening.

Brown-Forman is the company which owns Southern Comfort. Phil Lynch, vice president of corporate communications, said We made a terrible mistake. We didn't realize it was the image of a Hindu goddess. Lynch asserted it was only a day earlier that his company found out about the anger the display had triggered in Hindu communities in Europe and India.

According to Bimal Krishna das, general secretary of the National Council of Hindu Temples (United Kingdom), which had been in the forefront of the protests said that while the beverage makers were to be lauded for removing the offending display after being pressurized by the Greek government, it was unfortunate that they did not listen to the requests made earlier by Hindus and Sikhs.

Krishna das noted that he was disappointed that the Indian Embassy in Athens had ignored his organization's requests over the last three months to take steps to have the window display removed. We request the Indian embassies to be much more forthcoming in providing assistance to the Indian communities settled outside India. We also request the world-wide Hindu community to formulate a concerted strategy to make sure that no further abuse of Hinduism takes place anywhere in the world.

From BYU News Net

A Utah House bill that repeals parts of Utah's controversial anti-pornography law hints at the inherent problems with governmental regulation of Internet pornography.

While government has a responsibility to protect its citizens and enforce laws against obscene material, BYU law professor John Fee said state regulation of the Internet is problematic: The Supreme Court has been extremely protective of pornographic material to the point that it makes it very difficult for Congress or the states to meaningfully control pornography on the Internet. It doesn't mean there are no means left, but it makes it difficult, and it remains unclear what will be done in the future.

Rep. John Dougall, R-Highland, was the sponsor of an anti-pornography bill that was passed last year (2005), and is now sponsoring HB187, which amends and repeals portions of his previous bill.

The law requires Utah's attorney general to maintain a database of Internet sites that display content that could be harmful to minors and requires Internet service providers to filter content for households who request it. Dougall's bill removes the database requirement, and allows Internet service providers to charge for providing the filter.

When Dougall's bill was made law last year, it received extensive criticism from attorneys who said parts of the law were highly likely to be found unconstitutional. The American Civil Liberties Union and 13 other plaintiffs sued, and that litigation is still in progress. ACLU would not comment on the lawsuit, but said Dougall's latest bill is in response to the lawsuit.

Other anti-pornography bills are passing through the U.S. Congress right now, HB3479 would require Internet sites that sell pornography to use age-verification software to prevent access by minors, much like the software online tobacco and alcohol sales sites use. The bill also proposes a 25% tax on all Internet pornography sites. Both the age verification and the tax would be enforced by the Federal Trade Commission.

Fee said that although obscenity (usually interpreted as deliberately offensive, hard-core pornography) is not free speech protected under the First Amendment, it is extremely difficult for state and local governments to regulate because the sites offering such material may not be within the state: That creates additional problems because it affects interstate commerce. So our state law would affect people in another state.

He said a national law, such as Matheson's, could possibly be approved to regulate Internet pornography, but two attempts to create such laws have already been struck down by the Supreme Court.

Based on an article from The Independent

A Muslim pop singer has been forced to hire bodyguards to protect her during a visit to Britain next month after she received a string of death threats from religious extremists.

US-based Deeyah is due in London next month to promote a new single and video, released tomorrow. But the track "What Will It Be?" has already outraged hardline Islamists here as it promotes women's
rights.

Her performances with a clutch of male dancers and revealing outfits have also deeply offended many Muslims. In one scene in her latest video, the singer drops a burqa covering her body to reveal a bikini.

That has attracted vitriol from some quarters. The singer claims that in the past she has been spat upon in the street and told that her family would be in danger if she did not tone down her work. The situation is now so bad that Deeyah feels she cannot visit Britain without protection. I can no longer walk around without specially assigned bodyguards. I would be lying if I said abuse from religious fanatics didn't upset or scare me.

Deeyah was originally a singer of classical Indian music and lived in the UK until just over a year ago. But she claims to have been shocked by the reaction to her shift to pop music accompanied by raunchy videos: I had no plan to court controversy or anger people in my community. I wanted to make people think and confront my own fears as a Muslim woman, Soon, though, she was dubbed "the Muslim Madonna". And then came hate mail and abuse from extremists. I have  had people phone me and tell me they were going to cut me up into pieces. I became this figure of hate simply because of what I do and wear.

Based on an article from Stuff

The  controversial Bloody Mary episode of South Park that shows a statue of the Virgin Mary menstruating blood has kicked up a fuss in New Zealand.

C4 owner Canwest said the transmission is being brought forward as a matter of "democratic choice" to better inform the debate. The episode was originally scheduled for a screening in May, but will now be shown on 22 February.

The episode depicts a statue of Mary, mother of Jesus, bleeding, with Pope Benedict XVI putting it down to menstruation, rather than a miracle. The Pope's face and other church leaders are also sprayed with blood and a priest uses the blood to draw a cross on a woman's head.

The country's prime minister, Helen Clark, said she had not seen the show but that it sounded "revolting".  She added the company was free to screen the programme, but should weigh that freedom against a potential backlash of viewers.

Palmerston North Catholic Bishop Peter Cullinane said Catholics can choose to take a stand against what he calls crass insults by boycotting advertisers linked with the cartoon. He said many are bored with using official complaint channels that go nowhere. Boycotting advertisers is something different that others will notice: I don't think Catholics have any problems about laughing at themselves. Some people have said Catholics should grin and bear it. Ninety-nine percent of the time we actually do.

But he said ridiculing the people and things held dear by Christians is the same as ridiculing the prophet Muhammad. Media are selective about who they offend, he said: They wouldn't do it for Maori, for example - it would be out of bounds.

Bishop Cullinane said there are minor differences between the Muhammad and Mary controversies: With the prophet Muhammad the media could claim they were merely reporting, (but South Park) is not reporting anything. They're just using that kind of lewdness for entertainment.

Catholic Church in New Zealand spokeswoman Lindsay Freer calls the Canwest move an arrogant, cynical and unethical effort to capitalise on the debate and boost ratings: I can't use the words I'd like to use as they would be unprintable. I think there will be many people in New Zealand who will be deeply offended by using toilet, menstrual humour involving Mary to illustrate a plot.

CanWest TVWorks chief operating officer Rick Friesen said once viewers see the scenes in the context of the entire episode, he believes many New Zealanders will wonder what all the fuss was about.

Broadcasting Standards Authority chief executive Jane Wrightson said any attempt to stop the cartoon being aired is state censorship. No action can be taken until a complaint is made, and that can't happen until after it screens, she said: We have no power to operate before the event. That would be censorship by a state organisation and that's not what we do.

Predictably ludicrous response over an innocuous add on to a game.

From Reuters

Take Two, the publisher of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, is facing more legal action over the game.
Separately, two law firms have filed class-action lawsuits on behalf of shareholders who they say lost money due to the controversy about the game.

Take Two faced widespread criticism in late 2005 when hidden (innocuous non-explicit) sex scenes were found in the game. The discovery prompted the release of a cleaned-up version of the game and led some stores to stop selling it.

Now New York law firms Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman and Stull, Stull and Brody are filing class action lawsuits for people who owned stock in Take Two between the day when the game was released and the announcement of the LA lawsuit. Take Two stock fell sharply on the day the LA lawsuit was announced.

From The Guardian

If the certainty of having your collar felt, metaphorically of course, by the local police every few days is not enough to put you off walking the length of Britain naked, then the February wind blowing off the Pentland Firth should at least be a deterrent. So, as the Naked Rambler and his girlfriend finally arrived at the northernmost tip of Scotland yesterday, their first thoughts turned to clothes. "Quick, get them on," said Stephen Gough to his partner, Melanie Roberts.

Before they dressed, there was a little welcome party of locals waiting at John O'Groats with cameras and mobile phones to record the end of the 874-mile naked walk. Bobbie, a man in his 70s from the village of Halkirk, near Thurso, had driven down especially. It's not him I've come to see, it's the girlfriend  he said unabashed. It's a bit of fun. There's not much else to brighten the winter here.

Clothed, they reckon they could have completed the walk in 40 days, covering 20-odd miles a day. Naked, a few problems with the law lengthened the expedition. Gough was arrested nine times, Roberts five.

I've never been in trouble with the police before and I found the first night in the cells quite frightening, said Roberts, I still don't see what all the fuss is about.

In all, Gough has spent four months in jail for causing offence with his naked ramble. What's the point, why do it? Why do anything? I want to show people that nakedness is nothing to be ashamed about and they should not pass their shame on to their kids.

From The Scotsman

The BBC was censured yesterday by Ofcom, the media watchdog, after a number of performers used bad language during live coverage of last summer's Live 8 concert.

No time delay was used for the broadcast and the language, which sparked 400 complaints, was heard by young viewers before the 9pm watershed.

Madonna broke the swearing ban when she shouted Are you fucking ready, London? as she came on stage, while Johnny Borrell, lead singer of Razorlight, said: I say sign the fucking petition in reference to calls to ban world poverty. Snoop Dogg repeatedly chanted Get your motherfucking hands in the air.

The BBC said it regretted the offence caused to viewers, but also blamed a "confrontation" with the organisers for the fact that its key staff missed the performance by Snoop Dogg.

By the time the scale of the problem with Snoop Dogg's performance had become clear, the Corporation said it was felt that the moment for a full apology had passed, and that to have returned to the issue would have merely drawn further attention to the original offence.

BBC officials told Ofcom they had approached some performers before the concert over the issue of language, but had not been given access to all the stars.

Snoop Dogg's record company had assured the BBC the rapper would do "TV versions" of his songs, without swearing.

However, Ofcom criticised the BBC for not imposing a time delay, failing to ensure a senior editorial figure was monitoring output, and not giving an apology during the broadcast.

In a separate ruling, ITV soap opera Coronation Street was cleared by Ofcom following the use of the term "poor white trash" by an Asian character, a remark which prompted 500 complaints.

Ofcom said that while the term had obvious racist overtones, it could also be used in context to describe a "low socio-economic group".

Glasgow radio station Xfm apologised to the media regulator after broadcasting an Ice Cube song containing "fuck". The station's owners said the song had been mistakenly labelled as a "clean edit" in the station's computer system.

BBC Radio 1 breakfast DJ Chris Moyles was reprimanded by station managers yesterday after using "fuck" in conversation with a caller.

Surely Austria has enough incitement laws to deal with any serious crimes worthy of 3 years in jail without needing to stoop to punishing the ludicrous contradiction of well established history.

From The Times

David Irving, the far-right British historian, sat stunned and open-mouthed yesterday when an Austrian court found him guilty of denying the Holocaust and sentenced him to three years in jail.

I’m very shocked and I’m going to appeal, Irving said as he was bundled out of the Vienna courtroom by armed anti-riot police.

From the public gallery a British supporter shouted “Stay strong, David”, before he too was led away.

But in Britain there was dismay at a verdict that could turn Irving into a right-wing martyr.

Irving had pleaded guilty to denying the Holocaust in two speeches in Austria in 1989. He was arrested when he re-entered the country, where it is a crime to deny the Holocaust, last November, and had been in custody since.

During his seven-hour trial yesterday Irving sought to convince the jury that he had changed his mind and now acknowledged the murder of six million Jews by the Nazis. But the judge and jury were unswayed.

One hundred and fifty-eight people have been convicted of Holocaust denial in Austria between 1999 and 2004, but only a handful other than Irving have been imprisoned.

...Apologise or my mates will kick your head in...

From Christian Today

Danish church officials met with Egypt's top Muslim cleric in an effort to resolve the conflict caused by the Muhammad cartoons.

According to the Associated Press, however, no significant advancements were made during the meeting.

During the meeting, Grand Imam Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi of al-Azhar University, the world’s highest Sunni Muslim seat of learning, said the Danish prime minister must apologise for the drawings and further demanded that the world’s religious leaders, including him and Pope Benedict XVI, meet to write a law that “condemns insulting any religion, including the Holy Scriptures and the prophets.”

He said the United Nation should impose the law on all countries.

In response, Bishop Karsten Nissen of Denmark’s Evangelical Lutheran Church, did not address the issue of a global law but said that it was impossible for Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmusen to apologise for what a newspaper had published: I have brought to his excellency (Tantawi) the apology of the newspaper, but our prime minister did not draw these cartoons. Our prime minister is not the editor of this newspaper. He cannot apologise for something he did not do, Nissen said

Saturday's meeting was part of a four-day visit to Egypt by the Danish church delegation to open up a dialogue after the events following the publication of the Muhammad cartoons.

From Web India 123

Officials at the Bangladesh Ministry of Information said that a proposed law would be part of the governments drive to check the onslaught of obscenity on the local film industry. They said the plan is to ban the exhibition of English films in cinema halls in the districts and local levels.

The government was considering a number of steps to rid the film industry of vulgarity and encourage production of good films for healthy development of the industry, the New Age newspaper quoted Bangladesh's Information Minister M Shamsul Islam as saying.

The minister said some dishonest producers, distributors and cinema hall owners were showing uncensored and obscene English films, which could lead to the moral degeneration of society, particularly the young generation. So, we must take action against those who are responsible for the exhibition of obscene films, he added.

Earlier this month, the government had enacted a law to give some teeth to the Film Sensor Act. Producers and actors associations then claimed that the new law might be used as a tool for harassment against them.

The Ministry of Information will send the proposal to parliament shortly, even as the entertainment industry has given a mixed reaction to the move.

English films do not necessarily contain obscenity, and every year, Hollywood produces plenty of good movies. So, if the government enacts the law, moviegoers here will be deprived of watching many good films, said the owner of a movie-theatre in Dhaka.

From The Guardian

The government was urged to bring in new laws to ensure magazines and newspapers, including so-called "lads mags", featuring "disturbing pornographic" images be kept where children cannot see them. Labour's Diane Abbott, in an early day motion, also called for retail giant WHSmith to recognise certain tabloid titles as pornography [ie the Daily Sport] . Her motion states: There is still no legislation in place to ensure that adult titles, including so called lads mags, newspapers and tabloids containing disturbing pornographic material are kept out of the reach and sight of children.

From The Telegraph

Four out of 10 British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of the country, a survey reveals today.

The results of the poll, conducted for the Sunday Telegraph, came as thousands of Muslims staged a fresh protest in London yesterday against the publication of cartoons of Mohammed.

Last night, Sadiq Khan, the Labour MP involved with the official task force set up after the July attacks, said the findings were "alarming". He added: Vast numbers of Muslims feel disengaged and alienated from mainstream British society.

The most startling finding is the high level of support for applying sharia law in "predominantly Muslim" areas of Britain. Islamic law is used in large parts of the Middle East, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, and is enforced by religious police. Special courts can hand down harsh punishments which can include stoning and amputation.

40% of the British Muslims surveyed said they backed introducing sharia in parts of Britain, while 41% opposed it.

Based on an article from the BBC

Meanwhile 16 people have been killed/murdered in Northen Nigeria where Sharia law has already been established. Most of the deaths occurred in rioting in Maiduguri over the cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.

Witnesses said most of the dead were from Maiduguri's minority Christians. Eleven churches were also torched.

The BBC's Alex Last in northern Nigeria says the protest had begun peacefully in Maiduguri, and it was not clear what started the violence. The city's residents described demonstrators running wild after police tried to disperse the protest with teargas. Crowds of protesters carried machetes, sticks and iron rods through the city centre, the Associated Press news agency reported. One group threw a tyre around one man, poured gas on him and set him ablaze, it said.

Christian leader Joseph Hayab told the agency most of those who died were Christians: The Muslim group came out to protest and the security forces tried to ensure it was peaceful, but there were some hoodlums in the crowd and somehow the security forces shot one or two of them, They went on the rampage, burning shops and churches of the Christians. The protesters killed the others. Some were even killed in the churches.

From The Scotsman

A million dollar bounty for the killing of a cartoonist who caricatured the Prophet Muhammad was yesterday offered by a radical cleric in Pakistan, as thousands joined in street protests.

In the north-western city of Peshawar, the prayer leader Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi announced the bounty to a crowd of about 1,000 people. Qureshi said the mosque and his religious school would give $25,000 (£14,300) and a car, while a local jewellers' association would give another $1 million (£570,000).

Qureshi continued: This is a unanimous decision by all imams of Islam that whoever insults the Prophet deserves to be killed and whoever will take this insulting man to his end will get this prize.

The security forces were out in strength, particularly around government offices and Western businesses, as Muslims streamed on to the streets after Friday prayers. More than 200 people were detained, but most gatherings were peaceful.
 
Mogens Blicher Bjerregaard, president of the Danish Journalists' Union and spokesman for the cartoonists, condemned the bounty said the cartoonists - who have been living under police protection since last year - are aware of the reward and were "feeling bad about the whole situation".

In Islamabad, the former US president Bill Clinton criticised the cartoons but said violent protests by Muslims had wasted an opportunity to build better ties with the West: Most people in the United States deeply respect Islam ... and most people in Europe do.

Denmark announced it had temporarily closed its embassy in Pakistan. It also advised against travel to Pakistan and urged Danes still in the country to leave.

Pakistan, meanwhile, recalled its ambassador to Denmark for "consultations" about the cartoons, foreign ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said.

From The Guardian

At least nine people were reported dead in the Libyan city of Benghazi after a mob set fire to the Italian consulate.

More than 1,000 protesters set upon the mission, setting cars alight and breaking windows, apparently angered by a minister in Silvio Berlusconi's government who has said he intends to wear T-shirts bearing some of the cartoons.

An Italian consular official said nine protesters had been killed and several more had been wounded as armed police clashed with the crowd. State television showed part of the consulate on fire.

Italian state-owned RAI television said six members of the consular staff were trapped inside, but unhurt. RAI said anger mounted at the actions of Roberto Calderoli, the minister for constitutional reform, and a leading member of the xenophobic Northern League. Earlier this week, he announced that he planned to wear T-shirts featuring the cartoons that were published in European newspapers and have sparked violent protests around the world.

Last night Berlusconi asked for Calderoli to resign.
 

From Reuters

Google have formally rejected the U.S. Justice Department's subpoena of logs of Web searches, arguing the demand violated the privacy of users' Web searches and its own trade secrets.

Responding to a motion by U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Google also said in a filing in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California the government demand to disclose Web search data was impractical.

The Bush administration is seeking to compel Google to hand over Web search data as part of a bid by the Justice Department to appeal a 2004 Supreme Court injunction of a law to penalize Web site operators who allow children to view pornography.

Google is going it alone in opposing the U.S. government request. Rivals Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc. are among the companies that have complied with the Justice Department demand for data to be used to make its case.

Google's lawyers said the company shares the government's concern with materials harmful to minors but argued that the request for its data was irrelevant. They offered a series of technical arguments why this data was not useful.

The Mountain View, California-based company said that complying with the U.S. government's request for "untold millions of search queries" would put an undue burden on the company, including a "week of engineer time to complete."

Complying with the Justice Department request would also force Google to reveal how its Web search technology works -- something it jealously guards as a trade secret, the company argued. It refuses to disclose even the total number of searches conducted each day.

Google users trust that when they enter a search query into a Google search box ... that Google will keep private whatever information users communicate absent a compelling reason, attorneys for Google said in the filing.

The legal spat also comes amid heightened sensitivity to privacy issues by the company as it recently began offering a new version of its Google Desktop service that vacuums up data stored on user PCs and makes it accessible on the users' other computers. For customers who consent to the service, copies of their data are stored on Google's central computers.

Probably didn't espouse the required morality of intolerance and violent intimidation.

From The Telegraph

Algeria has banned as "immoral" a reality television show that has become so popular in the Arab world that restaurants in the region are empty during its broadcasts.

Star Academy, a version of Fame Academy, is keeping the Middle East on the edge of its seat with the rare sight of male and female contestants competing for the prize of money, fame and a record deal.

The show has weathered protests that it is "un-Islamic" and a toxic import from the West but this week Algerian national television stopped showing the programme after protests by the main Islamist party.

Aboudjerra Soltani, the leader of the Movement for a Society of Peace, said the show was a provocation against society and attacked its moral values. It can still be watched on satellite television.

Launched by the Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation and filmed in Lebanon, Star Academy starts with the pan-Arab recruitment of thousands of hopefuls, who audition to become one of the 16 finalists. The finalists live and train together in Adma, Lebanon, taking lessons in music, dancing, singing, fashion, hair-styling and make-up.

Star Academy is one of the few places in the Arab world where personal advancement depends on talent rather than connections, where men and women can mix freely, and where expressing individualism is something to be celebrated. Such values have made the show both controversial and hugely popular.

Star Academy has also attracted more than its share of militant Islamic critics, who maintain that the show transgresses the most basic Islamic principles, either because men and women live together in an "un-Islamic" way, or because they see reality television as an alien concept imposed by the West.

The Dean of the School of Islamic Law and Shari'a at Kuwait University passed a fatwa condemning the show; the Kuwaiti parliament has discussed legislation to "protect public morality" from Star Academy, and articles in the Saudi press have called the building where the contestants live "a whorehouse".

From DW World

Ernst Zündel, a Holocaust denier is in front of a German court on charges of inciting racial hatred and defaming the dead.

According to prosecutors, Ernst Zündel is one of the "most active" Holocaust deniers today. He began distributing Nazi and neo-Nazi propaganda in the 1970s and has written several books praising Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. Since 1995, he has been associated with a Web site that carries his name and is one of biggest online repositories of Holocaust-denial propaganda.

But Zündel, who was born in Germany's Black Forest region, was only able to engage in such activities because he was living outside of his native county, in Canada and the United States.

Although freedom of the press and of expression is written into German law, the country is generally more wary of free speech than the US, where Zündel's dissemination of racist literature and refutation of the Holocaust,  while distasteful to most, was perfectly legal.

In Germany, however, it was not. Zündel was deported to his native country in March 2005 after a long legal battle with the Canadian government. He found himself immediately under arrest and up against the German justice system. If he is found guilty by a court in Mannheim of incitement to racial hatred, libel and defamation of the memory of the dead, he faces up to five years in prison.

Article 5 of Germany's constitution, or Basic Law, enshrines the right of freedom of speech and of the press. Everyone has the right to freely express and disseminate their opinions orally, in writing or visually and to obtain information from generally accessible sources without hindrance, states paragraph one of the law. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting through audiovisual media shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.

But the next paragraph puts certain limits on that freedom, which were deemed necessary when the Basic Law was proclaimed in 1949, just four years after the end of World War II and the downfall of the Nazi dictatorship:These rights are subject to limitations embodied in the provisions of general legislation, statutory provisions for the protection of young persons and the citizen's right to personal respect, reads the second paragraph.

German law therefore constrains press freedom, said Udo Branahl, a professor of media law at the University of Dortmund:The penal law code says Holocaust denial is a punishable offense. That ban limits press freedom and overrides the right to free expression in the mass media.

So while in the US and Canada, Zündel could freely present his "evidence" that the gas chambers and crematoria of the Third Reich did not exist, in Germany, he was committing a crime that he would be tried for, even though it was not committed on German soil.
n weighing free speech against individual rights

The country's Federal Constitutional Court confirmed in 1994 that Holocaust revisionism is not protected speech. In weighing the importance of free speech against that of individual rights, courts must consider on the one hand the severity of the offense caused by Holocaust denial to the Jewish population in light of the suffering inflicted upon it by Germany, the court wrote at the time. This court has consistently protected the personal honor of those defamed above the right of others to make patently false statements.

From the Chicago Tribune

The student newspaper at Northern Illinois University this week ran the controversial Danish political cartoons of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad. The student paper at the University of Illinois is still reeling from the consequences of running them.

Harvard's conservative alternative paper has run them. On Wednesday, so did the alternative student paper at Illinois State University.

We weighed the potential backlash, the potential fallout and decided being afraid of backlash should not keep us from running a story, because where do you draw the line? said Northern Star editor-in-chief Derek Wright, as letters—many incensed, some supportive—began to arrive at the Star's offices at Northern Illinois. We felt it was something that was our responsibility.

As violent reactions to the cartoons simmer in the Muslim world—at least three more people were killed in riots in Pakistan on Wednesday—the controversial cartoons are trickling into student newspapers here.

Faculty advisers and journalism ethicists have rushed to frame the discussions with students over handling the images in their own campus papers.

For the most part, news organizations—including the Chicago Tribune—have decided it is enough to write about the cartoons and their aftermath without publishing them. Only two major U.S. newspapers have run the cartoons, the Philadelphia Inquirer and the American-Statesman in Austin, Texas.

The nature of the offensiveness alone creates a significant barrier to publishing or republishing the image, even if you can justify the original publication, which I think is not easy to do, said ethicist Bob Steele of the Poynter Institute for journalism.

Meanwhile, the Daily Illini's suspended editor, Acton Gorton, on Wednesday hired a Chicago-based Muslim-American civil rights attorney, Junaid Afeef. Gorton said he was defamed by the Illini's retraction editorial, which blamed the decision to publish the cartoons on a "renegade editor."

I just want to make sure I have good representation for whatever happens now, Gorton said. My career is in jeopardy.

The Daily Illini backlash was fresh in the minds of editors at NIU, where the Star's editorial board decided to publish the political cartoons last Thursday, but postponed doing so until Monday. Officials said they delayed to look into copyright questions about re-publication. But it was just as well they waited, Wright said. The reaction in Champaign prompted them to rethink how to present the material.

The 12 cartoons were run inside on Page 3 of the tabloid paper, with an editorial headlined "More Than Cartoons" on the front page. Alongside the cartoons, an article explained the controversy and student opinions. On Page 8, the Star ran an opinion column from a student Muslim group explaining objections to the images.

Feedback on the decision has been split, said Wright and Jim Killam, the paper's adviser. Some people, including Muslims, said they objected to the cartoons but appreciated the newspaper's muted presentation.

From The Telegraph

A TV advert featuring women kung-fu fighting and a lesbian kiss has attracted 50 complaints.

The French Connection advert shows a blonde and a brunette model fighting in a basement before getting soaked in water and sharing a passionate kiss.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said it has received around 50 complaints since the clip was first aired on Sunday night. A spokeswoman said: Complaints have been on two points. Some believe it's offensive in its sexual nature, particularly the lesbian kiss. Others have complained about the violence.

The new advert, directed by Duncan Jones, the son of singer David Bowie, is only shown after the 9pm watershed. The two models are initially immaculately dressed, but then throw each other around in violent scenes reminiscent of the film The Matrix. Their kiss is cut short with a headbutt from the dark-haired model, at which point the clip ends.