Tuesday, June 30, 2009


Dear Professor Harber,

As a Professor who professes (ha, ha!) to have an interest in freedom of expression in South Africa, I am surprised that you have not been publicly concerned about the fate of The FXI. Perhaps the reason is that you are reluctant to fall out with your friends at The FXI?


I think that you would agree that The FXI is now officially defunct. Jane Duncan has recently left, following Na'eem Jeenah's departure a while back. Nobody else has been appointed by The FXI's board and the phones at The FXI's offices are left unanswered.

Since I am not, thank God, a paid up member of the PC media elite, I am not privy to any stories about what has been going on behind The FXI's doors. However, I would imagine that The FXI has collapsed due to an inability to keep its international funders on board. So the question arises,..."Why have these funders turned their backs on The FXI?"

I believe that the answer is that The FXI's funders realized what The FXI was up to, and as a result, wisely decided that they would withhold further finance.

As you know, I regularly catalogued some of the things that The FXI was "up to" on my blog.... "FIX THE FXI", although I cannot be held fully responsible for its demise.


Monday, June 29, 2009


Dear Jane Duncan and Na'eem Jeenah,

It seems that The Freedom of Expression Institute is, on the verge of being fixed. Both of you have, thankfully, now absconded. And as far as I can gauge, nobody else appears to be "running" it.

Of course, this is a void that must be filled.

In such circumstances, I have decide to officially appoint myself.... executive director of The FFXI (The Fixed Freedom of Expression Institute).

If anybody has any objections, please let me know asap, and I will re-consider my nomination. Otherwise, I will contact the IFEX with the good news.

blacklisted dictator (executive director of the FFXI)

ps: do you want to hand over The FXI's website?

Tuesday, September 23, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan

The Malaysian government have arrested and imprisoned a blogger for "insulting Islam".

Does The Freedom of Expression Institute believe that bloggers should be arrested for "insulting Islam" ? If you don't, please ensure that The FXI supports the campaigns to release Raja Petra Kamarudin.




ps Why haven't you bothered to respond to my previous, attached, letter? Do you really believe that your ridiculous FXI statements are beyond reproach?

Dear Jane Duncan,

Why are you as executive director of The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) now pontificating about whether Zapiro might have defamed Jacob Zuma? Is that your job?? Do you represent Jacob Zuma?

Are you an attorney specializing in libel or are you the executive director of The FXI ?

You seem confused! As I have stated many times before, you have completely forgotten who you are!




Jane Duncan, the executive director of the Freedom of Expression Institute in Johannesburg, said on Tuesday she had initially thought the cartoon to be "quite risky”.

Duncan also believes that Zuma may have a case against Zapiro.

“Yes, Zuma can sue Zapiro for defamation because it could evoke an association with the rape trial and depicting him as a rapist while he was not found guilty," she said. "A cartoon is a creative form of expression and it can be read in different ways. So I think the cartoonist should be given the benefit of the doubt."

She added: “A cartoonist is a lot freer than a journalist”.

Friday, September 12, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan,

Why are you as executive director of The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) now pontificating about whether Zapiro might have defamed Jacob Zuma? Is that your job?? Do you represent Jacob Zuma?

Are you an attorney specializing in libel or are you the executive director of The FXI ?

You seem confused! As I have stated many times before, you have completely forgotten who you are!


Monday, June 9, 2008


Dear Messrs Trapido, Friedman, Sacks, Jeenah and Harber,

You all have "Mail and Guardian" Thought Leader blogs.

You should ask the following question...

Why has the comments facility been removed from The Freedom Of Expression Institute website?

What are the implications for freedom of expression in South Africa?


Friday, June 6, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan,

In your lecture at the graduation ceremony of the Faculty of Business, Management Sciences and Law, Walter Sisulu University on the 22 May 2008, you quoted Chomsky:

 ‘The responsibility of the writer as a moral agent is to try and bring the truth about matters of human significance to an audience that can do something about them. This is part of what it means to be a moral agent rather than a monster’ and you went on to say "Don’t allow your intellectual engagement to stop once you leave this University; make it your public duty to be heard."   

Excellent advice!

However, let us assume that one of these graduates becomes a "writer" and decides it is his or her "public duty" to be heard on The Freedom of Expression Institute website. How would such a "writer" be heard if The FXI continued to prevent any comments from appearing on the site?

Perhaps, ironically enough, The FXI has transformed itself from a "moral agent" into a "monster"? An interesting topic for another lecture?


Thursday, June 5, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan,

I have just logged on to The Freedom of Expression Institute website to read your fascinating report on Ronno Einstein's "intelligence" shenanigans.I wanted to leave a comment but it appears that this facility has now been withdrawn by The FXI. Is it a technical error or just another misguided attempt by the FXI to censor visitors to your website?


Friday, April 4, 2008


Dear Na'eem Jeenah,

I am extremely worried (you probably are as well!) that Al-Jazeerah international is facing serious problems. Will Al-Jazeerah's International's sugar-coated propaganda now be soured??

In the light of your thought provoking THOUGHT LEADER blog about Mo Bear, I thought that you might be interested in the following...

"And then there are cross-cultural ideological problems. It is said by one source that executives on the main Arabic al-Jazeera network are trying to exert more control over the English-language channel, which is mainly staffed by Western journalists.

One notable bone of contention allegedly came in the reporting of the arrest in Sudan last year of the British teacher Gillian Gibbons, for suggesting that a teddy bear be named Muhammad. There are claims that some at the top of al-Jazeera English wanted the station to take a “more Islamic slant”."



ps; Perhaps The Freedom of Expression Institute should now produce a handbook, using your hugely deserved grant from the George Soros "Open Society", on "Cross-cultural ideological problems and the global media"?

Sunday, March 30, 2008


Dear Na'eem Jeenah and Jane Duncan,

I refer you to UN Sec Gen Ban Ki-moon's reaction to "Fitna":

"I condemn, in the strongest terms, the airing of Geert Wilders’ offensively anti-Islamic film. There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not at stake here. I acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of this film, and appeal for calm to those understandably offended by it. Freedom must always be accompanied by social responsibility."

Do you both agree with him? Must freedom always be accompanied by social responsibility? Will The Freedom of Expression Institute uphold the freedom to broadcast "Fitna" in South Africa?



Dear Na'eem Jeenah,

In your THOUGHT LEADER profile, you boldly write that you are an "academic".

However, your WIkipedia entry states: "Jeenah currently works for the Freedom of Expression Institute in Johannesburg, South Africa. He has also taught Political Studies at the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg."


Would it, therefore, be more accurate to state, assuming of course that you actually had tenure, that that you were an "academic"?

There is still no mention in your THOUGHT LEADER profile that you are spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee. Do you feel uncomfortable with this role or do you think that some people might conclude that it compromises your position at The Freedom of Expression Institute?

The Mail and Guardian believes that you can write whatever profile you like and this, of course, indicates that Ferial is not too bothered about accuracy. Surprise, surprise?


Ps: Are you as "academic" as Dr Zapiro ? If so, what is your "academic" specialization?

Friday, March 28, 2008


Emailed to The Freedom of Expression Institute...

Dear Na'eem Jeenah,

Your THOUGHT LEADER blog profile states that you are an "academic" so you must be especially delighted that Zapiro has been awarded an honorary doctorate by Rhodes University. I think it would be fair to conclude that you and Dr Zapiro are now both "academics"!

I have noticed , however, for some strange reason, that Dr Zapiro's cartoons do not depict Ahmadinejad's Iranian shenanigans. I am sure that this is just an oversight on Dr Zapiro's behalf. Perhaps you could kindly bring it to his attention when you are both next in the common-room, smoking pipes and academically discussing international affairs? For even more academic contributions, you could always invite Profs Harber and Friedman as they are also leading lights in South Africa's intellectual community!

I have read that "human rights" are at the top of your lists, so please debate the merits of the attached extract....


"Currently, Iran's rulers are carrying out their most ferocious crackdown on young people - especially women - in recent years. In January alone, the regime executed at least 23 prisoners, murdered a dissident student in the north-western city of Sanandaj, executed another wounded prisoner lying on a stretcher in the northern city of Khoy, amputated the limbs of five prisoners in the south-eastern city of Zahedan, and sentenced two teenagers to be thrown off a cliff in a sack in the southern city of Shiraz, a city famous for its poets, jasmine, and rose gardens."


Thursday, March 27, 2008


Dear Na'eem Jeenah ,

Tom Gross, the media analyst writes: "While many in the Islamic world and in the West have strongly condemned cartoons deemed offensive to Muslims, such as those that appeared in a Danish paper caricaturing Mohammed, there is near-silence among western media and NGOs about anti-Semitic cartoons that are spreading across the globe."

Gross includes, within the antisemitic category, Zapiros's cartoon of Olmert cutting up body parts.

Is The FXI/PSC, a prominent NGO, concerned about these double standards that have infected the South AfrIcan press? It seems that you are extremely worried about the Danish cartoons but you seem to support the appearance of cartoons that represent Israelis as Nazis. Is it because you are not only the director of the Freedom of Expression Institute but also spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee?

Alan Dershowitz in his book "The Case for Peace" writes:
"Notice that Israel is never compared to Stalin's Soviet Union, to Mussolini's Italy, to Franco's Spain, to Castro's Cuba, to Pinnochet's Chile, or even to Hirohito's Japan. It is always and only compared to Hiter's Nazi Germany. I have often wondered what could motivate any person of presumed decency to compare Israel's treatment of Palestinians to what the Nazis did to the Jews during the Holocaust. Israel's goal is to protect it's civillians from Palestinian terrorism, whereas the Nazi goal was to genocidally destroy every Jewish baby, child, woman and man so as to eliminate the Jewish race. The analogy is obscene and yet it is repeated daily on college campuses, by mainstream European political activists, and even by writers and intellectuals. It's target audience is the current generation of college students too young to remember the Holocaust and too caught up in the passions of the day to bother to research the history. When a lie is repeated often enough, it risks becoming conventional wisdom. Comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is anti-Semitism, pure and simple. There is no other explanation, especially in the light of the reality that there is no actual similarity between Hitler's systematic genocide of the Jews and Israel's efforts to defend itself from genocidal threats against it's Jewish population".

I look forward to your response.


This is not about freedom of speech
Na'eem Jeenah, Charles Amjad-Ali and Salim Vally: COMMENT
10 February 2006 06:00
That the real issue surrounding the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad is hate speech and incitement to violence, rather than freedom of expression, is clear when the intent behind their publication is understood.

The cartoons were meant to be inflammatory, showing disrespect and lack of moral maturity. The problem is not whether the Prophet should be pictured. It is that they portray him as an al-Qaeda image of violence; they portray Islam a violent religion. Aesthetically valueless, they were intended to incite right-wing racists to violence against “the terrorist within”.

The notion of “the enemy within” was used in Nazi Germany to demonise Jews and it became part of the propaganda arsenal that supported the Holocaust.

And cartoons too were a weapon used to demonise Jews, just as the radio was used in Rwanda to demonise Tutsis and to assist in that genocide.

An instructive exercise would be a comparison between the hate-filled Danish cartoons and the brilliant social commentary and caricatures, even of religious practice -- such as the Catholic fatwa against condom use -- by South Africa’s Zapiro.

We are not advocating that criticism of religion is taboo or religious topics are sacrosanct; religions themselves develop and advance through criticism. And, often, internal criticism is harsher than that by outsiders.

The 12 cartoons were published by Jyllands-Posten following its invitation to 40 cartoonists to parody Muhammad in order, as is clear from the invitation, to provoke Muslims.

They become truly dangerous in the context within which they were published: in a Europe that manifests increasing levels of Islamophobia and xenophobia, especially against Muslims, and where Muslims are demonised and scapegoated for increasing social misery. Further, they were published in Denmark, which has been named by the European Union Commission on Human Rights as the most racist country in Europe. It has witnessed a large number of attacks against Muslims, some resulting in the killings of Muslim immigrants. And, they were published by a newspaper with historical ties to German and Italian fascism and which called for a fascist dictatorship in Denmark. Jyllands-Posten is also anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim. Within such a context, these cartoons are clearly hate speech. Their publication is an ontological attack against the foundations of Islam.

How might Christians respond if Jesus was drawn wearing a crown of nuclear bombs instead of thorns? Or as a Roman soldier shoving his spear into the sides of Palestinians hanging on crosses? Or what would the Jewish reaction be to a cartoon of a Jew in the 1930s dreaming up a scheme to help relocate European Jews to Palestine and imagining the Holocaust as the way to do it.

Or of Moses as the pilot of an Apache helicopter firing on Palestinian homes.

When the debate erupted, we were quickly reminded that the West is a secular society with ideals of tolerance and open debate, even if such debate offends. But freedom of expression cannot be a carte blanche right to be used by racists and xenophobes to perpetrate violence. We can’t piss in Trafalgar Square or openly drink beer in the streets of New York or walk the malls of Johannesburg naked. If we can be punished for impinging on public space, should we not also be subject to limitations for hate speech against religious or cultural groups? We agree with Robert Fisk that this is not an issue of secularism vs Islam or of a clash of civilisations but is, rather, the childishness of civilisations.

The double standard goes beyond that. Since Holocaust denial is a criminal offence in many European countries, should Islamophobia and the assault on Muslim religious symbols not also be regulated? Jyllands-Posten refused to publish caricatures of Jesus in 2003 because they would “offend” its readers. Why then is its invitation to caricature Muhammad protected by free speech provisions?

In the current debate, the greater immaturity is not by the Muslim protestors but by those Westerners who refuse to see the bigotry, prejudice and Islamophobia and, in doing nothing, encourage hatred and violence.

Within the context of a Europe with escalating Islamophobia and racism, the responsibility is on us all -- Muslims and non-Muslims, atheists, secularists and believers -- to speak out.

Or we might have to live with the legacy of our silence as we, today, have to live with the legacy of genocides against Jews in Europe and Tutsis in Africa.

An additional issue raised by the current furore is of the dominance of liberal democratic notions of rights. Rights are only, according to such notions, individual. There is no space to consider the violation of the dignity of a community or the right, as a community, not to have one’s religious or cultural symbols denigrated, or the right of an entire people not to have its history under colonialism whitewashed. The notion of collective or communal rights is one that requires serious consideration in a young democracy like South Africa.

Disempowered Muslim communities in Europe and other parts of the world have expressed their right to free expression in the only manner they have available -- by taking to the streets in legitimate articulations of outrage and celebrations of democracy.

But some responses have been shortsighted, even immoral, as if to say: “If you insist on calling us terrorists, we will behave like terrorists.” The burning of embassies, the loss of life in Afghanistan for the sake of some stupid, albeit offensive, drawings and the placards that threaten bombs have not been in keeping with Islamic or Western democratic norms of protest and expression. Muslims’ right to dignity should be protected in their protests too. And their legitimate revulsion for attacks against religious symbols should also be expressed when we witness incidents such as the Taliban’s destruction of the Bamayan Buddhist statues.

Legitimate protest should not be allowed to be hijacked by dictatorial regimes whose primary agenda for jumping on the popular bandwagon is to deflect attention from their repression and denial of rights. Nor by the United States’s neo-cons who pontificate about the Danish cartoons when it was their theology of civilisational clashes, the new American century, Pax Americana and us-and-them polarisation that created the global conditions for such denigration to take place.

In South Africa, threats to the Mail & Guardian editor, phone calls to her mother and threats against property have been part of this phenomenon. There is a distinction between gratuitous reproduction of the cartoons as hate speech and the use of one cartoon by the M&G for didactic and illustrative purposes. Living in a rights-based society requires people to acknowledge and respect the rights of others as much as they require similar recognition for their rights.

Na’eem Jeenah is president of the Muslim Youth Movement, Professor Charles Amjad-Ali is a Christian theologian and Salim Vally is the former chairperson of the Freedom of Expression Institute

Tuesday, March 25, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan and Na'eem Jeenah,

Is there freedom of expression in South Africa?


"I think that my point stands... the SA press does not satirize Islamic fundamentalism. It is an extremely important point, and with regard to this discussion about Zap's Israel cartoons, needs to be emphasized.
I have explained some of the reasons for the press failure to satirize Islamic fundamentalism and I believe that it is a craven response to the bullying tactics of the MRN/PSC/RONNO EINSTEIN etc lobby."

Posted by: BLACKLISTED DICTATOR | March 25, 2008 at 10:47

Please ensure that The Freedom of Expression Institute/ Palestine Solidarity Committee responds asap.


Monday, March 24, 2008


Dear Na'eem Jeenah and Jane Duncan,

Does The FXI/PSC agree with Amyan al-Zawahri ? It is important to know where precisely the Freedom of Expression Institute/ Palestine Solidarity Committee stands on this issue...

"Like bin Laden, the al-Qaeda second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri. issued a threat against those countries in which cartoons of Muhammad were published, saying that "They cannot insult our prophet and support Israel and then expect to live in peace in the countries."


So... should the Danes live in peace or should they be bombed into submission?

Btw, are we safe in South Africa?


ps; I have cc'd Prof Anton Harber (Wits School Of Journalism) as I know that he is particularly concerned about freedom of expression. Perhaps he can write a joint paper with Steven Friedman ?

Sunday, March 9, 2008


 Dear Na'eem Jeenah and Jane Duncan,

Can The Freedom of Expression Institute ensure that Prof Hussein Solomon is not allowed to speak in South Africa?

Updated Press Release: SA Muslim community vilified in presentation at counter-terrorism conference

Press Release:
SA Muslim community vilified in presentation at counter-terrorism conference

Media Review Network is outraged at the defamatory statements made by Professor Hussein Solomon during a presentation at the 7th International Conference of the International Institute for Counter Terrorism in Herzliya, Israel on 10 September 2007.

Hussein Solomon’s was speaking in his capacity as director of the Centre for International Political Study (CiPS) at the University of Pretoria.

During this presentation Solomons claimed:

* South African Muslim organizations, mosques and the Muslim media were psychologically preparing local Muslims for terrorism;

* military training is occurring at various South African Muslim high schools;

* Muslims were a potential threat to the 2010 World Cup;

* South African madressahs (religious schools) were a breeding ground for terrorism;

He went on to state that the local Muslim community was “volatile” and would provide safe-houses and money to potential terrorists.

Nowhere in his 25 minute presentation on “radical” Islam in South Africa, did Solomon provide any shred of evidence to substantiate his distortions and wild allegations.

Solomon’s irresponsible claims unjustly sustain the misconception that Islam and SA Muslims are a threat to domestic and world peace. This erroneous perception leads to the unfair profiling of Islamic schools, charities and religious organizations, and creates a climate where all Muslims are feared and despised.   

The content of Prof. Solomon’s presentation vilifies the entire Muslim community of South Africa, and is one of the most rabid forms of Islamophobia ever encountered. That the conference hosts and fellow speakers allowed such baseless allegations to masquerade as an academic presentation reveals the deep-seated anti-Islamic sentiments of this gathering.

Solomon’s participation at this anti-Muslim conference in apartheid Israel alongside known Islamophobes and Muslim-bashers such as Steven Emerson, Daniel Pipes, Binyamin Netanyahu, Reuven Paz and others is an indication of his role in fuelling alarm and suspicion against Muslims in SA.

We believe that Solomons has an obligation to provide indisputable evidence to back-up his incriminating allegations or to retract and apologise. If Solomons persists in making these incredible allegations we demand that Professor Solomon substantiate his contemptible claims, and explain to the Muslim community of this country how he arrived at such ludicrous conclusions.

Issued by:
Suraya Dadoo (Researcher Media Review Network)

TIMESONLINE (From The Times February 4, 2008)
Sean O’Neill, Crime and Security Editor
South Africans may be required to obtain visas to visit Britain under moves to close routes exploited by people-smugglers and terrorists.

Law enforcement agencies have been putting pressure on ministers to overhaul immigration rules that allow South African passport holders to enter Britain without a visa and stay for six months.

The Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca) recently smashed a people-smuggling gang that brought more than 6,000 illegal immigrants into Britain on forged or stolen South African passports.

Intelligence services and anti-terrorist police have also shut an al-Qaeda cell, members of which had been travelling to terrorist training camps in Pakistan via southern Africa.

With 450,000 South African nationals entering Britain annually it has proved relatively easy for terrorists and illegal migrants to go undetected.

Sir Stephen Lander, chairman of Soca, has been pressing for a tightened visa regime in the wake of the people-smuggling case, codenamed Operation Coptine. He told MPs on the Home Affairs Select Committee that the case was “likely to lead to the reintroduction of a visa regime”. The Home Office confirmed that it is looking at the situation.

The five-year operation against people-smugglers — which involved agencies in South Africa, the United States and Canada — resulted in the convictions of more than 40 people.

They were members of a gang operating out of Leicester which, over a decade, smuggled people out of villages in Gujarat, India, to South Africa, where they were supplied with false or stolen passports.

The migrants, who paid the gang between £5,000 and £8,000 each, were then brought to Britain where many registered as students or found work. About a quarter of the illegals acquired British passports under different identities for travel to the United States and Canada.

One woman arrived in Britain using a fraudulently obtained South African passport in the name of Swati Mistry. She was subsequently detected trying to fly to Orlando, Florida, from Gatwick airport using a false British passport in the name Fazila Saleh.

Yusuf Mewaswala, 49, the leader of the gang, received a ten-year jail sentence — his third conviction for people-smuggling — but is believed to have made millions of pounds in profit from his operation.

Others convicted included specialist forgers and facilitators, and men and women who were paid £1,000 each to act as couriers accompanying the illegal migrants on transatlantic flights.

Details of the alleged terror cell — which is also understood to have exploited lax controls — linked to South Africa cannot be revealed at present for legal reasons.

Intelligence experts are concerned that al-Qaeda has been using South Africa as a support base for training and fundraising for operations elsewhere. JOHN SOLOMON, Head of Terrorism Research for World-Check, has studied the terrorist presence in South Africa and concluded that there was “a discernible pattern” of activity.

He said: “Prominent global jihadis . . . have used southern Africa as a possible medium through which not only to stage operations, but also to secure refuge, money and recruits.”

A British terror suspect, Haroon Rashid Aswat, was held in Zambia in 2005. Aswat, a former lieutenant of Abu Hamza al-Masri, is believed to have been hiding in southern Africa and may have had links to an al-Qaeda support network. He is in Britain awaiting US extradition proceedings.

The Home Office confirmed that Liam Byrne, the Immigration Minister, was reviewing the visa arrangements for South Africa and a number of other countries outside the European Economic Area. The review is expected to conclude later this year.

MPs are to be asked to give ministers powers to order an inquest to sit without a jury or to appoint a coroner to prevent sensitive information from being disclosed. Provisions in the counter-terrorism Bill would allow the Home Secretary to intervene in a hearing into a sudden or unexplained death in the interests of national security.

The proposals have generated concern among lawyers and some coroners as such powers are not confined to inquests into the deaths of terrorist suspects.


Dear Jane Duncan and Na'eem Jeenah,

I want to make an urgent formal complaint to The Freedom of Expression Institute about the censorship of comments on Na'eem Jeenah's "Thought Leader" blog.

Please let me know how I should proceed. Is there a FXI form that I should fill in or is this email sufficient ?

Further censorship details can, of course, be accessed on my blog : http://fixthefxi.blogspot.com/


ps : it seems that "Sting" is having similar problems.


My previous comment was censored (or not accepted; whatever suits you), which astounds and alarms me, because it violated none of Thought Leader’s rules. I can’t help wondering what I’ve said that is so offensive that it doesn’t warrant inclusion among these remarks.

(This non-inclusion is especially ironic, I am sure you will agree, considering that I’m commenting on a column written by someone who is the “Director of Operations” at the Freedom of Expression Institute of South Africa).

Here it is again, as I can best remember it. (Rats, I should have kept a copy, but I didn’t, because I post comments - albeit anonymously, which is my right - in the belief that I’m entitled to my opionion.)

“Not the sharpest pencil in the box, are you, Na’eem? What is it about the term ‘racist’ that you don’t understand? Or are you arguing, God forbid, for two different sets of standards? One for everone (ie, democracy) and another for ‘black’ people (ie, democracy-Lite) who, poor souls, are too ignorant to handle the real thing?. Your comments are hollow and deeply insulting.”
Sting on March 9th, 2008 at 2:32 am

Your comment is awaiting moderation.


I have also had a problem with the censorship of my comments and would refer you and other readers to my blog which gives details..


It is particularly ironic that I have been censored when both Jeenah /”MidaFo” have had extremely vitriolic comment directed at me published.

One has to wonder whether Thought Leader might be protecting Jeenah.
BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on March 9th, 2008 at 11:57 am

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
If anybody feels that they have been unfairly censored on Jeenah’s blog by THOUGHT LEADER, please email me… aposner@iburst.co.za

I will take the matter up with Jane Duncan and Na’eem Jeenah at The FXI.
If they do nothing about it ( they probably will ignore my complaint since it is made by Jeenah’s critics), it will be further evidence that they do not really believe in freedom of expression!


BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on March 9th, 2008 at 6:02 pm

Thursday, March 6, 2008


Some questions are being addressed to the Director of the Freedom of Expression Institute on his Thought Leader blog....
Coconuts, racism and SABC politics

You write:
“Those who are powerless cannot be racists.”

How did Hitler get into power ? He started out as a “powerless racist”.
Before you start pontificating, it might be an idea if you read some history books !
BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on March 6th, 2008 at 9:13 am

I wonder when, or if, comrade Na’eem is going to revisit his own blog and answer the many well-considered rebuttals of his twisted thesis..?
Or is he the type who likes to begin a spurious argument about “racism” (which cannot exist anyway if “race does not exist”) and then run away rather than confront the inconvenient truth that by his own self-contradictory utterances he himself may be the very embodiment of the racism he strives to expose..?

And before Na’eem tries to exonerate himself by bleating “I cannot be a racist because I dont have any power..!” Given that he has a blog on a major news site - presumably read daily by thousands - on which he can disseminate deceitful white-bashing drivel like the above piece of nonsense, doesnt he possess infinitely more power than a white “racist” - who would certainly not be permitted an M&G mouthpiece or, for that matter, the video-making “gang of four” young white student pranksters..?
invinoveritas on March 6th, 2008 at 5:20 pm

Yes, the emperor/ director of The FXI has no clothes. Well spotted!

Who can believe that Jeenah has the intellectual honesty and ability to address the spurious ramifications of his racist theory ?

Jeenah has his own political agenda and freedom of expression and proper debate are not at the top of his list.
http://fixthefxi.blogspot.com/ on March 6th, 2008 at 11:31 pm

Monday, March 3, 2008


My previous blog was not included as a comment on Na'eem Jeenah's THOUGHT LEADER piece about his brother.

I phoned the Mail and Guardian's THOUGHT LEADER editor and was told that my comment was rejected on the basis that Na'eem is under no obligation to reveal that he is spokesperson for The PSC.

I retorted that the exclusion of my comment was tantamount to censorship. After further persuasion, THOUGHT LEADER"S editor asked me to re-submit my comment and said that it would be included.

If my comment is not included, I will of course, immediately refer the the matter to Na'eem Jeenah at the Freedom of Expression Institute.

(Good news... my comment was published so I won't have to take the censorship issue up with Na'eem Jeenah. However, it will be interesting to see whether he personally addresses the issue on his blog or whether "MidaFo" writes on his behalf.)



Is The Freedom of Expression Institute obsessed with Zionists?

You write on THOUGHT LEADER blog
“Some Zionists who have suddenly decided that the South African struggle is a good example of peaceful resistance from which those barbaric Palestinians should learn. We are lectured by young Zionist students who were not even born when my brother was brutally murdered, telling us what the South African struggle was about and how it was fought. The Palestinians should learn from South Africa, they say; they should struggle and resist non-violently and peacefully.”

Is the above written from your perspective as spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee ? If it is, why don’t you make your formal allegiance to the cause clearer ?

It seems to me that you are obsessed by “zionists”; you even have to bring them into a very sad story about your brother’s murder.

BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on March 3rd, 2008 at 10:56 am

Sunday, March 2, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan,

It seems that Prof Harber has nailed his colours to The FXI's mast. Of course, he has, also nailed his colours to Ronno Einstein's mast so one can conclude that the Prof is,at least, politically consistent. In this regard, Harber has perhaps taken a leaf out of Stephen Friedman's book ?

Prof Harber and Prof Friedman have taught me never to disregard the tawdry web of political allegiances in post apartheid South Africa.


RE: Na'eem Jeenah's ( Director of the Freedom of Expression Institute) THOUGHT LEADER blog :" Lash those name-givers"

Congratulations to NaƩem on an excellent post.
For those who insist that religious intolerance is a Muslim preserve, please note that the state of Texas a few days ago forced an educationist to resign from public service because she circulated an e-mail informing her colleagues of a public lecture on Darwin’s theory of evolution. We can also be confident that the Rabbis who tried to get a pizza parlour outside Tel Aviv closed down because women were allowed in are dreaming up new assaults on freedom as we speak.
Those of us who believe that religion and democracy are compatible have a tough task - posts like Na’ eems help to keep the fight alive.

Steven Friedman on December 6th, 2007 at 10:17 am

Dear Na'eem,

Why didn't you publicly castigate Stephen Friedman for misspelling your first name ?

You were, after all, acerbic when Robert MacDonald wrote "Jeemah" in his letter to you.

Have you double standards?


Saturday, March 1, 2008



Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Why are you so condescending??
You write:
“Firstly, Mr Macdonald, the name is Jeenah, not Jeemah. Fortunately, I am not one to be offended by the misspelling or mispronunciation of my name; it happens all the time. Besides, noting that that was not the only spelling error in your comment makes me feel better.”

Na’eem, do you want me to correct all your grammatical errors ? Your blog is littered with them and indicates that you are not an “academic” .

Please set the record straight and tell us why you (Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute) continue to tout yourself as an “academic”.
BLACKLISTED DICTATOR on March 1st, 2008 at 1:09 pm

The above was copied to various people, including Prof Harber. He replied:

On 01 Mar 2008, at 1:54 PM, Anton Harber wrote:

I have asked before and will ask again. Please defrain from including me in these emails. I have not interest in this petty, small-minded exchange which seems to serve no useful purpose and is often offensive.

Anton Harber

In response to the above email, I replied:

Dear Professor Harber,

Whilst you are a highly respected academic at Wits School of Journalism, Na'eem Jeenah is not even a lousy academic at The Freedom of Expression Institute. In fact, there seems to be no evidence in the public domain to suggest that he is an academic of any kind whatsoever.

The truth is that Na'eem Jeenah is an Islamic activist. This includes being spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee.

Jeenah's profile on THOUGHT LEADER is misleading in that it states that he is an "academic" and excludes the fact that he is spokesperson for The PSC. The profile 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."

As a "highly respected academic" and a world-renowned journalist, I am extremely surprised that you consider such matters as "petty". I think that they are extremely important.

kind regards
Anthony Posner

Saturday, February 23, 2008


Dear Jane Duncan,

Do you think that it is right that Na'eem Jeenah ( director of The Freedom of Expression Institute) holds so many political portfolios ?

Isn't it possible that his various allegiances might conflict withn his work at The FXI ?

Aren't you concerned that The FXI's reputation might be tarnished as a result of his "other" agendas ?


Thursday, February 21, 2008


Dear Jane,

Let us assume that you were sacked as exec director of the Freedom of Expression Institute and were forced to spend the rest of your life, as a freedom of expression "activist" in either Tehran or Tel Aviv... which city would you choose ?

viva etc
blacklisted etc

Monday, January 21, 2008


Date: 21 January 2008 4:20:11 PM
To: geoffs@icon.co.za, karma@telkomsa.net, jpollak@law.harvard.edu, almost.supernatural@gmail.com, jduncan@fxi.org.za, wgkopp@gmail.com
Cc: wendy@beyachad.co.za, editoronline@mg.co.za, kgovender@ukzn.ac.za, Thomas.Wheeler@wits.ac.za, david@beyachad.co.za, jorgeR@Advantage.am, anton@harber.co.za, ferialhp@mg.co.za, hugh@raichlinattorneys.co.za, naeem@fxi.org.za, letters@citizen.co.za, jeftic.tanya@gmail.com

Dear All,


Since I exposed Na'eem Jeenah's "addiction" to freedom of expression on The Mail and Guardian's THOUGHT LEADER blog in Dec 2007, the director of The Freedom of Expression Institute has remained silent. He has not responded to my allegations and he has not written a further word.

Do you think that he has the intellectual courage to enter into further debate ? Or is he now attending "Freedom of Expression Anonymous" ?


The Blacklisted Dictator.

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. http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/naeemjeenah/2007/11/
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
To: letters@mg.co.za, editoronline@mg.co.za
Cc: jduncan@fxi.org.za, naeem@fxi.org.za, ferialhp@mg.co.za

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
E-mail: riaanw@mg.co.za
Website: www.mg.co.za

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
To: thoughtleader@mg.co.za

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
E-mail: riaanw@mg.co.za
Website: www.mg.co.za


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 ?

Friday, November 30, 2007


The following are questions for Na'eem Jeenah, Spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee and Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute (they have also been raised on Na'eem Jeenah's THOUGHT LEADER blog)

1:Do you support Hamas ?
2:What do you think about its antisemitic charter ?
3: What do you think about the bloodshed perpetrated by Hamas at the recent Arafat demo in Gaza. Do you condone it ?

p.s: Hamas on Thursday called on the UN to rescind the 1947 decision to partition Palestine into two states, one for Jews and one for Arabs.
The group said in a statement, released on the 60th anniversary of the UN vote, that "Palestine is Arab Islamic land, from the river to the sea, including Jerusalem... there is no room in it for the Jews."

Thursday, November 29, 2007


Dear Na'eem Jeenah ,
Delighted to see that you have a blog on The M&G's "Thought Leader". It really shows that The Freedom of Expression Institute is not just a front for The Palestine Solidarity Committee but is, when you come to think of it, nothing less than a true guardian of freedom of expression in South Africa.

viva etc
blacklisted etc

p.s I attach some of my comments and doubt that you will have enough freedom of expression/ guts to reply.

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
On cacti and keys; memory and forgetfulness

What I really admire about you is the way that you so brilliantly combine your roles as spokesperson for The Palestine Solidarity Committee and Director of The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI). Many people in your positions would end up sullying the reputation of The FXI. However, you have only served to enhance it.
How do you manage to retain such credibilty ?
Is it because you were breast-fed The Truth ?

Independent Newspapers censors, withdraws and censors again
You write:
” PS: Like all my other posts on Thought Leader, this one does not purport to represent the views of the Freedom of Expression Institute and the FXI does not necessarily agree with any of what I have said here.”

Your post deals with freedom of expression issues. Do you hold different views when you walk into The FXI’s office ?

Why on earth wouldn’t The FXI agree? You are the Director of The FXI !
Surely you can agree with yourself ? If you can’t agree with yourself, you should perhaps seek help?
FIX THE FXI on November 29th, 2007 at 6:57 pm


What do you think about the recent Hamas attack on the Arafat demo in Gaza? It led to many deaths and much bloodshed.

You write:
“To insist that one cannot hear the voice of the oppressed unless one also hears the voice of the oppressor is, at best, cowardly acquiescence and, at worst, collaboration with oppression.”

Were the demonstrators murdered?
Are you a “coward” who “at worst is collaborating with Hamas oppression”?