Journalist Arrested By Interpol For Tweet

New submitter StarWreck writes "Police in Kuala Lumpur detained Hamza Kashgari, 23, 'following a request made to us by Interpol' on behalf of the Saudi authorities. Kashgari, a newspaper columnist, fled Saudi Arabia after posting a tweet which read: 'I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don't understand about you I will not pray for you.' Said tweet sparked outrage in Saudi Arabia and resulted in multiple death threats. Kashgari faces the death penalty in Saudi Arabia."

Comments

and where is exactly the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can someone enlighten me, please?

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[mosb1000]

The tweet was made on Muhammad's birthday. He was accused of apostasy as a result, an offense punishable by death in the muslim tradition.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[NIN1385]

This is exactly the type of extremism that turns me away from religion, and that applies to all forms of it. To threaten death, or other forms of punishment for saying something... I just have the feeling if God or Allah or whatever deity were to reveal them-self, or return to us or whatever they would probably be like: "WTF are you people doing?"

Just my opinion though.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[maxwell demon]

Apparently the Saudis put out the warrant and the Malaysian authorities detained at the airport and are shipping him back. Apparently the Malaysians are really amenable to the foreign governments about extraditing and returning people, so even if this guy faces the death penalty the Malaysians just don't want to get in the middle of things.

I guess the moral of the story is that if you are going to flee to another country, try some place like Canada or Sweden first.

But if you choose Sweden, keep away from the women.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[SaXisT4LiF]

According to the article, the tweet in question was a reference to the Prophet Muhammud. In some parts of the word, disavowing the religion of the majority (apostasy) can be punishable by death. Interpol's compliance in this act violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Interpol itself is tasked with upholding by its constitution.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[Ethanol-fueled]

One of my favorite readings about religion is Dostoevsky's The Grand Inquisitor, which is featured in The Brothers Karamazov. Basically, Jesus returns to earth in the midst of the Spanish Inquisition. He goes around and does his Jesus thing, giving sight to the blind and healing the sick. The church gets word of this and arrests Jesus, putting him in a holding cell and sentencing him to death.

The Grand Inquisitor, knowing it's really Jesus, goes to Jesus' cell and asks him what the hell he's doing. Jesus wants to know why the church is treating him this way and the inquisitor says, "You're bad for business. Now that you're here, what the hell are we gonna do? Sorry man, it is in our best interests to make you disappear."

Jesus, somewhat homoerotically, kisses the inquisitor on the cheek and says, "I love you, brother." The Inquisitor, very moved by the gesture, opens the cell and releases Jesus, saying, "Get the hell out of here, and don't come back." Jesus walked off into the darkness and was never heard from again.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Such extremism isn't the sole domain of the religious, and I say that as an atheist. The assholes will always find some way to legitimize their assholeness, if not religion then some other idealogy like nationalism, racism, economics, etc.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

"About the only two groups who haven't waged wars for their religion (or lack of one) are atheists and Buddhists"

If you think Buddhists have never fought wars over their beliefs then you know very little of Asian history

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

In Western theological terms, that's like saying that Christ is an inspirational person with some really interesting teachings, but not the Son of God. That's about as blasphemous as you can get.

Except in Western terms, we don't put a price on your head for saying that.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

In Western theological terms, that's like saying that Christ is an inspirational person with some really interesting teachings, but not the Son of God.

There are days you see this five times before breakfast ... and yet no killings, no nothing.

It's called "freedom of religion". Muslims demand it from others, like the west, so why do they get to do this ?

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[tokul]

certainly one cannot be executed for leaving their religion

apostasy is punishable by death in Islam

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[canadian_right]

In the west the "not putting a price on your head" for blasphemy is fairly recent thing. From wikipiedia:

The last person in Britain to be sent to prison for blasphemy was John William Gott on 9 December 1921

and as late as 1977 a Briton was charged with blasphemy. So we in the west are two or three hundred years ahead of the middle east in moral development which shouldn't make us too smug. Just look at the USA and the number of people trying to get religion back into schools and courts. Don't be complacent. Superstition and hate needs to be constantly fought.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[canadian_right]

Stalin did NOT collect stamps. This lack of stamp collecting was of course the main reason his leadership led to some much death and suffering. We must immediately promote stamp collecting to stop this sort of grievous crime from every happening again.

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[shutdown -p now]

Whoa, that's a pretty broad brush you are painting with there. Let's not forget the millions of Muslim people who do not support terrorism and are as peaceful and law-abiding as most of the Christians in the world.

You know, I used to buy that line - that there are a few very vocal extremist Muslims that tarnish the real image of the religion of peace, but otherwise they're all really nice and mostly like us except for a few meaningless rituals. Then I ran into some interesting stats - from Wikipedia:

A survey carried out by the Indonesia Survey Institute found that 43% of Indonesians support Rajam or stoning for adulterers.

A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center found relatively widespread popular support for stoning as a punishment for adultery in Egypt (82% of respondents in favor of the punishment), Jordan (70% in favor), Indonesia (42% in favor), Pakistan (82% favor) and Nigeria (56% in favor).

Note that Indonesia is generally considered to be one of the most civilized Muslim majority countries - it's not officially an "Islamic state", and it clearly sets out freedom of religion in its constitution. Yet almost half of their population - exactly half if you only count Muslims - support death penalty, carried out in public, in a very nasty way that's deliberately designed to be prolonged and painful, and performed with active involvement of the community (to remind, rajm is generally meant to be carried out by the observers throwing stones). I'm not ashamed in the slightest of calling that half barbarians, because that's what they are in this day and age.

Turkey, now, is a different matter - practically an exception. But Turkey got where it's at by virtue of a single man who was leading it at the time embarking on what was, essentially, a very secularist and anti-religious campaign, forcing it upon the population - he was just careful enough to never openly say it was aimed against religion, but rather against "barbarous customs" and such.

(As an aside, this is also why democracy and human rights are, at present, concepts that are diametrically opposite in most Muslim majority states - so when you wish for democracy in Egypt or Libya or Syria, be sure that you understand well enough what it implies.)

Re:and where is exactly the problem?

[MikeBabcock]

The second question was obviously rhetorical, and meant to point out that the one talking to him was skirting the point of acknowledging that he is God. He acknowledged his Godhood on several other occasions, making this one out to be a denial is to ignore the rest of his words.

Much of the world has "illegal speech"

[RightSaidFred99]

And it's not just those backwards fools everyone in the middle east talks about. There are upstanding, progressive regimes in Europe where there are literally things you can say that don't involve a threat of violence or which won't cause immediate danger to those around you ("I'm going to kill you!" or "Fire!") which are still considered illegal.

It's cute because these same nations are held up by many as paragons of virtue in terms of human rights, health care, standard of living, etc... Just don't voice an illegal opinion and you'll be fine, that's all.

Re:Much of the world has "illegal speech"

[Old VMS Junkie]

There's a big difference between threats or statements that might endanger the safety of others and someone stating their feelings towards a religious figure. Just another sign of the Muslim world's complete intolerance, total lack of religious freedom, and complete lack of respect for human life and dignity.

Bad title.

[Anonymous Coward]

Interpol has no "officers" to arrest anyone. It is a multinational organization that facilitates the sharing of info, and arrest warrants, between countries. Here, Saudi Arabia sent out an arrest warrant to Interpol and Interpol transmitted it to police in Kuala Lumpur. The police in Kuala Lumpur arrested. Interpol is just a middle man. We can argue whether it's good or bad (probably both), but Interpol doesn't "arrest" anybody and they didn't force the Lumpurian authorities to arrest. Interpol can't force the police of any State to act. Kuala Lumpur probably doesn't care about this guy and figured better relations with Saudi Arabia is more important.

Re:Bad title.

[Teun]

By their own rules Interpol is not supposed to intervene on the grounds mentioned.

The fact Saudi Arabia has an inhumane legal system is widely known and as long as we want their oil it is not likely to change, but Interpol has done something against the moral values enshrined in their own constitution and the persons responsible should be challenged.

Fuck you all

[future assassin]

I'm just gonna say it right out. Fuck Muhammad and Islam, Fuck Jesus and Christianity and Fuck you and all religions where you have to pray to show devotion and destroy your enemies. Got to love this world. One one side you're getting fucked by your government, right next to it you are getting fucked by corporation and right next to that you're a target some some fucking religious freaks that instead of keeping away from you and minding their own business are trying to enslave or kill you.

Problem here is "racism"

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

The problem with this statement is very simple. If you actually implement this, you are basically making it impossible for muslims to live their religion. It is how their culture works and self-polices. Cut this out, and you destroy it.

Additionally, this is no joke. Saudis and a lot of muslims will scream (quite literally sometimes) about racism if you criticise their attitude towards "hate speech" (executing anyone they perceive as insulting, and there's plenty of example where the person didn't even say anything, it was just "generally thought" (sometimes because of lying) that he said/did/... something). Reading the actual primary sources of the religion, it's plain and obvious that this is how islam works, and they're vastly more flexible than the muslim example. The prophet had people buried in sand in the desert to watch them die for criticizing him.

Cutting out this means flat out declaring the central figure of islam to be an inhuman moronic, cruel paedophilic bastard.

Of course, that's exactly what he was.

Until we face this reality, and force muslims to accept people saying this everywhere on this world, this won't end.

Re:Problem here is "racism"

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

I have very few problems with invisible wizards, provided they do not order large mobs to kill others.

Needless to say, islam's invisible wizard is found lacking.

Re:Problem here is "racism"

[greenlead]

Ummm... no. Most Christians (and Jews) do not accept Islam as legitimate.

Re:Problem here is "racism"

[gtall]

Well, the U.S. loved Egypt until the revolt, then it told Mubarak to hit the road, Jack. After Quaddafi was "rehabilitated", didn't take Washington too long to show him we loved him enough to send the very best in the business end of smart bombs.

Wanna bet if a good revolt happened in Saudi Arabia how long it would take Washington to heave the royals overboard and start anew with whatever takes their place. Mind you, what will take their place won't be pleasant for anyone, but that won't stop Washington...well...Obama anyhow, from trying.

Re the imperialism thing, err...we sort of gave Iraq back to the Iraqis, we didn't even steal their oil. Of course they are making a mincemeat of their new country, but that's what happens with tribal societies that are in shotgun marriages. Come to it, we gave Kuwait back too. Hmmm...we gave Panama back as well. Hey, is there a pattern here?

Got any other straw men in addition to "imperialism"? By the way, last we checked in on S. East Asia, the countries there appear to want to be snuggle bunnies with the U.S. Something about China throwing their weight around or something. Hell, even Vietnam wants to get under the covers. Could be a trend? No, couldn't be, must be U.S. Imperialism.

But that is the core of Wahhabism.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

It is really confusing. One of the fundamental tenet of Wahhabism, was to reduce the amount of veneration of Mohammad. They claim even having the idea of a holy site associated with mortals is idolatry. Wahhab was worried Muslims of elevating Mohammad to the status of God. Sunni's fundamental complaint against Shias is that the Shias worship many saints in addition to Allah. Now the bastion of Wahhabism, Saudi Arabia, is turning against a journalist for treating Mohammad as a human being?