Saturday, December 8, 2007


The following comments have been posted on Khadija Sharife's THOUGHT LEADER (M&G) blog

You have written in truth and well and you are right about the erosion of Western civilisation. I am a Western educated African and I am worried too.

While any oppressed group has angry individuals within as the duplicitous FXwhatever takes pains to claim here that only Hamas has, and even that Hamas only has, it always remains true that you cannot deal with opposition by only looking at the worst side. One has to find the best in people. You clearly do look for the best and offer it while this maladroit FXwhatever attempting to fasten his teeth onto you only looks for the worst in those he disagrees with. If his approach is valid we can all only kill or be killed.

Which of course is what the actions of the apartheid clone called Israel is doing.

By the way FXwhatever has also used the name Mangy Cur and his tactics are used by bloggers on the Al-Jazeera site with the clear intent to muddy the waters and destroy the possibility that blogging gives us of sharing insights.
Fxwhatever is not opposition. He is an operative, bitter, lonely and disliked anywhere, possibly even paid and trained in this propagandist tactic, a tactic which is designed to swamp and destroy your generous voice.
I suggest you ignore him. Read the post and comments below and see what I mean.
He cannot touch you. Remember that if you speak to fools you will be a fool.
Be aware that he sees you as a danger because you are too clever for him, too generous. He is a classic mediocrity and shows it in his pathological desire to destroy anyone beyond him. And you and almost all people are are beyond him and those very possibly with him in this thrust of his.

And let him speak Thought Leader! He is self-destructive enough to trash his agenda and destroy the name of those he supports. Those who go with him deserve what they get.
MidaFo on December 6th, 2007 at 3:03 pm

Both Jeenah and Midafo have attacked me personally and both should carefully consider whether they are breaching THOUGHT LEADER’S guidelines.
For my part, I have always used polite language and believe that important issues should be debated without recourse to personal attacks eg’s Jeenah comment that I usually “write worse than a 12-year-old.”

In the circumstances, I want to make it quite clear that I am not anti-Islam.
BLACKLISTED DICTATOR /FIX THE FXI on December 7th, 2007 at 12:57 pm

Is MidaFo your pseudonym ? Some people have emiled me suggesting that it might be.
Please set the record straight.
BLACKLISTED DICTATOR /FIX THE FXI on December 7th, 2007 at 11:20 pm

Dear Jane Duncan,

The following comment has appeared on Khadija Sharife's THOUGHT LEADER blog in response to a comment that I posted about Hamas.

I think that you would agree that the attached is a convoluted attempt to limit freedom of expression. It has been written by somebody using "MidaFo" as a pseudonym. Do you, by any chance, recognize the writer's style ?

Does The Freedom of Expression Institute approve of the sentiments expressed by "MidaFo"? Perhaps you could kindly pass this email onto Na'eem Jeenah for further comment?

You should also bear in mind that previous comments written by "MidaFo" have been edited by THOUGHT LEADER owing to their venomous comment; they broke the Mail and Guardian's guidelines with regard to personal attacks.

viva etc
blacklisted etc

The Good and the Ugly

This is very long but it is not rocket science.

Some people blog to beat, and others blog to win.

The first never learn from the activity because they deny the losers any validity and never honour those who win against them. The result of engaging with any one of this group of beaters is that you are sucked into an embrace that leads to an infinite regression of mutual self destruction. Sometimes extremist and always de contextualised views from your side are assiduously hunted out, often with the help of clerks in army uniform (you are facing propaganda remember), and thrown into your face in an attempt to force you in your obvious good will and honesty to run around in circles checking your sources and it usually ends up that all you can do is hunt out the inevitably plentiful extremist views from the beater’s side (Al-Jazeera can help) and throw them at him in a sort of intellectual mud-pie contest. Then you are lost because his side has the position and guns to throw explosives as well as propaganda, economic hardship, social devastation and starvation at you and your side.

We do not have to imagine this: we can see it in the history of events in “Israel” and read it in the Republican propaganda in the USA with its resultant use of explosives and death in Iraq and Afghanistan. The man of multiple names wants this to happen to you and from my small but intimate experience of agents in South Africa there is self-hate in his stance so he will do it to the point of death because nothing can shame him. Witness G.W. Bush and the “Israeli” people, which should show you that this is a criminal mind set that cannot admit defeat because there is nowhere else to go for them: for them it is beat or damnation.

The second kind, those who blog to win, can and do learn because the losers are congratulated for competing.

On the word count the comparative elegance should be clear.

The present regimes in “Israel” and the USA cannot see the difference between beating and winning and the damage they cause is plain to see. Likewise the Nationalist Party did enormous damage in South Africa because it couldn’t see.

The ANC dramatically restructured the politics of winning after the unspeakably dreary years of White/Nat rule. With all the ANC’s current problems this remains true and it is interesting to see how many in white SA cannot see this. The latter’s plentiful utterances and those of the man with many names speak more about them than they do about anything else.

This latter, which is by far the biggest problem in SA, is indicated by a number of unrestructured racists and Nats on this blog, which is unfortunately in turn indicative of the structure of the middle class.


Beating reduces competing to the level of warfare. This is well expressed in what is known as Game Theory which has as one of its fundamental tenets that in order to compete you must believe absolutely in the implacable desire of your opponent to destroy you. This is all very well in Chess or cricket or rugby and so on, because they have rules of the game, a referee, and an ambulance nearby and other than the fact that in accordance with the self-hatred mentioned above it still destroys the sport over time, it can be tolerated in that sport is a limited field of play, you don’t often die and the culprits are usually rooted out before that time. It is when the ethos is applied outside sport as in politics or business, economics or religion that it becomes clear it makes these activities become alternative ways of fighting a full scale war, for the simple reason that the board or field is everywhere unlimited. This means that the term Game Theory as use by the “Israelis” and the Americans is in fact a propagandist term to hide the systematic ill will of naked warfare being applied in peace time. In short, in our present reality, Game Theory is a propagandist’s term for War Theory. The effect has been to make gangsters out of presidents.

Names are not necessary.

Although it may be possible to right the seriously unbalanced people who live in this way it is also true that their destructive power is often underestimated. Again just look into SA’n history, or again the Nazi’s, or again the “Israelis”, or again the Americans under their recent crop of leaders. Of course this list is vastly incomplete but this little observation should make it clear that there is indeed a problem in the West as some bloggers here and elsewhere have already observed.

We need to be able to recognise these war mongers who suck those who are blinded by stupidity and pride into their maelstrom.

They are sectarian and accordingly completely dedicated to defining and finding fault with the Other, they are Right, they are lacking in generosity, fearful (with all the connotations of heroic noise to disguise this) hence either cosying up to those who are extraordinarily over-endowed with penile substitutes such as arms and ammunitions, or are themselves so endowed, and they display their mediocrity by being avidly on the attack against those who are more generous in conception or too weak to prevent easy theft.

There are many problems associated with this list in the paragraph above, not the least being that it is incomplete and will be out of date as soon as it is read because war mongers are duplicitous. Again look at the “Israelis” and the Americans.

I will deal with two problems.

Firstly this list is incomplete and hence not definitive:
It is however indicative of the mentality of the war monger and the evidence is that the people who read and contribute to this blog are capable of extending it in this meaning themselves.

Secondly, the warmonger has no integrity and will immediately proclaim the opposite of what can be shown to define him as a warmonger or else accuse others of the behaviour (remember when the Nats controlled the news?):
Well good luck with this one but somehow I believe people can tell a liar and, as with the supporters of the Nats, that it is the liars that support the liars. This is indeed so indefinite as to be unworkable when applied to others, but it is not so when we apply it to ourselves. So when we blog and read blogs we must be honest and watch for the sectarian, Right, lack of generosity etc in ourselves.

And to do this is simple.

Again I now have two suggestions as to how.
One is that we must seek to enjoy and agree with those who come from another intellectual space.
Then let us recognise that to be a fool one merely has to speak to fools and so we must stay away from the avid attacker, the presumptuous superiorist of the right, even if he happens to be affectionately on our side at any time, unless of course you believe he can be jolted into his senses. If you try to jolt and are not successful then ignore him totally and immediately otherwise you are effectively accepting an abusive lover.

Remember that the warmonger, in his mediocrity, never stops because he simply has to destroy those beyond him, and as they say, you cannot do business with a crook, but you better not love an abuser or a wife beater.

Wednesday, December 5, 2007


Dear Jane Duncan,

Your colleague at The Freedom of Expression Institute states on his THOUGHT LEADER profile that he is an "academic".

For the record, which university is he affiliated to ? Is he a lecturer ?

viva etc
blacklisted etc

Date: 05 December 2007 12:08:16 PM

Dear Madam,

What is The Mail and Guardian's definition of an "academic"? On Na'eem Jeenah's THOUGHT LEADER profile, he states that he is an "academic". Does that mean he is a lecturer at a university ?

If he does not hold such a position, don't you think that he should amend his profile?


Na’eem Jeenah ( Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute),

The Mail and Guardian on-line editor has asked you to consider inserting the fact that you are the spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee on your THOUGHT LEADER profile.

Sorry to sound like a 12 yrs old but why have you not done so ?

-----Original Message-----

Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 12:37 PM
To: Riaan Wolmarans
Cc: Jane Duncan; na'eem jeenah; Ferial Haffajee Personal

Dear Riaan ,

Did Na'eem reply to your email ? ( his profile still hasn't been
amended to include that he is spokesperson for the Palestine Solidarity
Committee. )

It is evident that Na'eem is using his FXI credentials to further his
PSC work. To my mind, this is a blatant abuse of the THOUGHT LEADER
platform that M&G has given him.

Riaan Wolmarans
Editor: Mail & Guardian Online
Tel: +27 11 250 7353

He did receive my email, he said.

However, though you may have a point about his interests, his bio remains his business. We don't prescribe to TL contributors what to write on their blogs, and we are not prescribing what they should put in their bios either.

All we can do is request someone to consider changing their bio, which is what we have done.

Tuesday, December 4, 2007


As Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute, Na'eem Jeenah always dodges difficult issues on his THOUGHT LEADER blog. He is skilled at propaganda but proper analysis seems to leave him floundering. Perhaps he is not quite so "academic" as he boasts (take a look at his M&G profile) ?

Naeem, I reiterate my questions :

What do you think about the way that Ahmadinejad’s regime persecutes women in Iran who are demanding basic rights ? Should they be imprisoned and lashed? Do you approve of Ahmadinejad’s clothing regulations for women?

Or do you give “Ahmadinejad>Hizbollah>Hamas” a green light because they pray/plot for Israel’s destruction ?

If you do, one would have to conclude that your Islamic political agenda is at odds with your freedom of expression portfolio.

Monday, December 3, 2007


Date: 03 December 2007 1:14:46 PM

I refer to Na'eem Jeenah's THOUGHT LEADER profile. It states...
"Na'eem Jeenah is the director of operations at the Freedom of Expression Institute. He is also a social activist, an academic and a commentator on a range of issues."

However, it does not mention that Jeenah is spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee. I think that such information is highly relevant as Jeenah is using his blog for PSC propaganda purposes. As a result, the editor of THOUGHT LEADER should immediately amend Jeenah's profile.

Dear Anthony

We do not write contributors' bios for their blogs -- that is their own

I will ask him whether he would like to include what you have suggested.

Riaan Wolmarans
Editor: Mail & Guardian Online
Tel: +27 11 250 7353


Na'eem Jeenah, Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute, has a blog on THOUGHT LEADER. So far, inter alia, he has remained silent with regard to the following:

5 Responses to “Lash those name-givers!”

Your Olmert (omelette) pun is ingenious. As spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee and Director of The FXI, would you have time to do some stand-up comedy? I think that you have a natural talent. Perhaps you could do a few gigs in Gaza?

BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on December 2nd, 2007 at 3:00 pm

Your blog fails to identify the reasons for the extreme fundamentalist concoction within modern Isalm.
I would really like to know why some Muslims have gone down this dark alley. Please let us know your views on this matter.

FIX THE FXI on December 2nd, 2007 at 3:24 pm


Mo Bear should be viewed in a wider context as it seems that people are bing persecuted in the Islamic world for many different reasons…

What do you think about the way that women are being arrested (+ sentenced to lashings) in Iran for demanding some basic rights ?

Do you support Ahmadinejad’s regulations re female clothing ?

FIX THE FXI on December 2nd, 2007 at 6:23 pm


And what do you think about the sentence handed to the woman in Saudi Arabia ( 200 lashes and imprisonment) for “getting herself” raped ?

Can you understand that this barbarity leads to Islamophobia ?

Before criticizing America, plus Israel and The West, it is about time that Islamic commentators like yourself started to put your own house in order!

BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on December 2nd, 2007 at 6:52 pm

Na’eem- I’m going to have to use this for some of my comedy material:)

But I agree with ‘Fix the Fxi’- you should answer and speak on behalf of all the millions of Muslims in the world and defend or explain their actions!![not..]

Bilal on December 2nd, 2007 at 10:35 pm

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Seems to me that Na’eem’s loyalties are split.

As Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute he is supposed to believe in freedom of expression.

But as an Islamic / PSC activist, he is ambivalent about the doctrinaire / reactionary strands which characterize the ideologies of regimes that he admires ( eg Ahmadinejad’s Iran and Hamas). Moreover, with regard to the antisemitic Hamas charter, Na’eem remains silent.

I have tried to discuss such matters in numerous emails to The FXI but they remain unanswered. Clearly The FXI is in a bit of a fix.. it needs to be fixed!

FIX THE FXI on December 3rd, 2007 at 9:58 am

Blacklisted Dictator, I’m confused about this statement;

“Can you understand that this barbarity leads to Islamophobia ?”

Are you saying that there are some valid reasons for Islamophobia? I’m fascinated.

Ndumiso Ngcobo on December 3rd, 2007 at 1:09 pm

Ndumiso, of course there are valid reasons for Islamophobia, you fool! Just as there are valid reasons for racism (Black people are stupid) and valid reasons for anti-semitism (Jews want to take over the world) and valid reasons for sexism (women become silly and emotional when they menstruate) and just as women sometimes ask to be raped (like when they dress improperly). With logic like this we can justify apartheid, mysogyny and the oppression of virtually any group anywhere in the world at any time.

Na'eem Jeenah on December 3rd, 2007 at 2:39 pm


I agree that…
(1) Black people aren’t stupid
(2) Jews don”t want to take over the world etc

However, your conclusion is illogical because, it is beyond doubt, that Islamic “justice” (eg in Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Iran) is currently extereme/ barbarous. As a result, it can lead to Islamophobia.

Why dont you answer the other questions that I have raised ? Is it because you are reluctant to engage in a frank discussion ?

Sunday, December 2, 2007


Dear Jane Duncan,

I hope that you are getting time to read Na'eem Jeenah's "THOUGHT LEADER" Mail and Guardian blog. It is very funny and shows that The Freedom of Expression Institute isn't just high-minded and serious... Na'eem is quite a laugh ! He seems to have a natural talent for humour which might be getting over-looked in his day to day "hum-drum" work at the FXI.

I have, as a result, suggested that Na'eem does some stand-up comedy gigs in Gaza. If he can't get a booking there, he could try Khartoum?

I know that you are "The Brains" at The FXI so please you could elucidate (assuming that Na'eem can't) some of the reasons for the extreme fundamentalist concoction within modern Islam? Perhaps you could post a comment on "Lash those name-givers!" ?
viva etc
blacklisted etc

Na'eem Jeenah writes:
Lash those name-givers!

A few years ago, at a conference in the Middle East, I met a man called Mustapha (which is another name for the Prophet Muhammad). Interesting guy, Mustapha. Passionate about social justice issues, outspoken against Islamophobia, strident critic of Israeli occupation, a strong believer in equal rights.

But … someone needs to take Mustapha’s parents out into the street and lash them! You see, Mustapha’s family is Christian. And Mustapha himself is a Marxist and an atheist.

Following on the recent Sudanese decision about Gillian Gibbons, I have decided to start a campaign to evaluate the conduct of all Muhammads, Ahmads and Mustaphas (and any others who also have a name that was attached to the Prophet Muhammad). If any of them falls short in his general conduct (as well as those who happen to have decided to become atheists), his parents (or whichever relative gave him his name) should be taken into the street and flogged publicly.

This, really, is the ridiculousness of that Sudanese ruling.

Oh, and talking of that decision, what about the parents of the little boy whose name is Muhammad and who suggested naming the teddy bear “Muhammad”? Surely they deserve more than just a lashing for naming a son such as him with such a noble name! Lash them too!

By the way, we should organise a little vigilante force to find the parents of the president of Sudan (if they are still alive) and have them also lashed. How dare they give that insolent boy the name (Hassan) of the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad?! Actually, without giving it too much thought, I think the one Muslim I can quickly think of whose parents shouldn’t be lashed is the Pakistani general-ex-general-president. Now those were parents with foresight, naming their son Perverse (sorry Pervez).

If we consider the name-lashing thing to go beyond the Muslim community (as I suggested it should with Mustapha’s parents), then another set of parents I would regard as safe from the threat of lashing would be the mother and father of the Israeli prime minister. Omelette (sorry Olmert) is a really inspired name. Oops, scratch that. That won’t work; we are dealing only with first names here.
2 Responses to “Lash those name-givers!”

Your Olmert (omelette) pun is ingenious. As spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee and Director of The FXI, would you have time to do some stand-up comedy? I think that you have a natural talent. Perhaps you could do a few gigs in Gaza?
BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on December 2nd, 2007 at 3:00 pm

Your blog fails to identify the reasons for the extreme fundamentalist concoction within modern Isalm.
I would really like to know why some Muslims have gone down this dark alley. Please let us know your views on this matter.
FIX THE FXI on December 2nd, 2007 at 3:24 pm

Mo Bear should be viewed in a wider context as it seems that people are bing persecuted in the Islamic world for many different reasons…

What do you think about the way that women are being arrested (+ sentenced to lashings) in Iran for demanding some basic rights ?

Do you support Ahmadinejad’s regulations re female clothing ?