Let’s get a few things straight from the beginning:
1. I am white, Western European by origin with American blood, a baptised but non-practising Christian, I live in an Islamic country in the Middle East and I am a degree educated individual with a fairly open mind and a hunger for understanding. I also have many Muslim friends and colleagues (as well as Jews, Druze, Christians and Hindus . . .)
2. Violence is generally the worst way of solving a problem and should only ever be a last resort.
3. Freedom of speech is to be encouraged, not stifled
4. Self-regulation is better than legislation as long as societies and individuals can be trusted to behave responsibly, with respect and equanimity.
Now we have that out of the way, let’s look at the most bizarre, worrying and badly judged situation to happen in recent memory – the cartoon caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him).
While no thinking person, Muslim or otherwise, can fail to commend the notion of freedom of speech, it is equally important to recognise that all freedoms come with responsibility.
The decision to produce a cartoon featuring the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in itself has to be questioned in terms of how responsible or otherwise such an act is. The decision to publish such an item in a mass media outlet is beyond consideration. It was just plain wrong and wholly irresponsible. Full stop. Period.
Respecting someone’s religious beliefs does not make us subservient to that religion – it just marks us out as being reasonable and tolerant. We would not serve pork to a Jew, we would not serve beef to a Hindu so why would we print offensive cartoons featuring a caricature of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)?
This is a fundamental element of Islamic faith. In the same way the Christian tradition forbids idolatry and the Jewish faith refrains from naming God. This is a well-known fact of Islam and should be respected. To not only represent the Prophet (PBUH) in these execrable cartoons (which in itself is an insult to Muslims) but to ridicule the Prophet (PBUH) and attempt to suggest that he is connected to terrorism is puerile, grossly inflammatory and utterly mindless.
When I lived in Greece, shortly before the Athens Olympics there was an art exhibition in the capital city as part of the Cultural Olympics. One of the exhibits was a representation of Jesus Christ performing an unnatural sexual act.
Now how many of you self righteous Christian Right Freedom of Speech supporters feel that that is an appropriate image for public display and that religious Christians would not find this offensive? Ah, I thought so. . .
You see I am not concerned whether Christ performing a sex act is art, or that a newspaper has the freedom to publish a cartoon. My concern is that people in positions of authority or influence need to behave responsibly and not test the limits of their freedoms endlessly. Freedom requires faith – if you continue to test its boundaries, you will begin to find that limits start to be imposed and freedoms start to be denied.
The publishers and editors of Jyllands Postern in Denmark made a great mistake and committed a huge error of judgement when they published the now infamous cartoons. In short, they behaved irresponsibly.
If they had apologised unreservedly for their error of judgement in a timely fashion, had pledged never to repeat such a pointless and offensive act, then this may have avoided the subsequent onslaught of problems and political crises that have evolved from this incident.
Instead they tried to defend their position by claiming they “never meant to insult or offend anyone” – come on guys, think about it! This is just not credible. It is a little like pointing a gun at someone, pulling the trigger, watching the blood start to flow and then saying you didn’t mean the shot to wound or injure.
Moreover, they resorted to hiding behind freedom of speech instead of admitting they acted irresponsibly.
This combination of publishing the cartoons, failing to apologise appropriately and in a timely fashion and then hiding behind freedom of speech as an excuse were enough to ignite a very strong response from Islam . . .
Now, let’s take a look at the other side of the coin . . .
I believe that Muslims are right to be offended, just as the Orthodox Christians of Greece were offended by images of Christ performing unnatural sexual acts. I also believe that the Muslims are right to suggest that this was a deliberate blow against Islam – the other assumption is that the editors of the paper concerned are educationally sub normal retards who genuinely had no idea that this would cause offence . . .
I also believe that Islam was entitled to ask for an unconditional apology from the papers that printed these cartoons.
I think that when these requests were met with half-hearted responses, that Islamic countries were entitled to boycott Danish products in protest. Peaceful boycotting of products is an entirely appropriate way to make a point.
However, the violent protests, the burning of flags and embassies and destruction of all things Western which have occurred in places like Pakistan, Syria and Lebanon, have no place in modern political diplomacy and dialogue.
The right to peacefully negotiate and discuss the issues behind the publishing of the cartoons was unfortunately given up when radical elements of Islam took to violent protest and wilful destruction of all things Danish and indeed other countries from the West.
The right to the upper hand in terms of political dialogue between Islam and the West was also given up at the same moment, as was the opportunity to use this incident to build understanding and peace between Islam and the West.
Instead, the West, which began this whole issue firmly in the wrong, is starting to be vindicated. Not in terms the legitimacy of the publishing of the cartoons, but in terms of the idea that Islam is reactionary, militant and prone to violence. An accusation which is to the greatest part false as anyone who lives in most Islamic countries will testify, but which appears to be true under the spotlight of the western media which are highly selective in their focus, and heavily under the influence of the Christian right and the pro-Israeli Jewish lobby.
Now some parts of Islam are requesting that Europe and the UN institute legislation and codes for respecting religion. This is not the answer. If someone does not possess enough decency, tolerance and sense then enforced legislation is not the solution. Education, information and open mindedness would make a far better option.
What a shame!
What a shame for the millions of Muslims whose right to worship in their chosen fashion and under their own codes was so offended by the West, but their right to reply was thwarted and undermined by those self same people who they consider their brothers.
What a shame for the West with its hideously self righteous assumption that it can criticise, insult and denigrate whomsoever it chooses without fear of retribution because it conceitedly and arrogantly believes that civilised society can only exist in the secular, materialist and right wing countries in Europe and the United States. What a shame that being educated, challenged, informed or open minded is discarded in favour of being bigoted, prejudiced and narrow-minded.
What a shame for world diplomacy. A shame that in the 21st century we continue to reduce ourselves to baiting others and responding in violence.
What a shame that in a post 9/11 era instead of taking the opportunity to extend the hand of peace, we taunt and bully, instead of extending our ears to learn and understand, we put on the mufflers of deaf ignorance and prejudice.
But maybe there is more to this than meets the eye? Maybe this is a diversion for more sinister affairs? With Hamas now legitimately in power in Palestine, after the democratic election process so forcefully demanded by the US (and which suited the US at the time as it favoured their chosen party Fatah), with Syria on the brink of major diplomatic crisis following the Hariri assassination one year ago, (and which many still believe had the hand of the US or the Israeli’s behind it), the on-going turmoil in Lebanon (see above) and of course the nuclear “threat” from fundamentalist Tehran, there is a lot at stake in the Middle East at the moment.
The traditional approach of the US in terms of maintaining the power of the West (which it leads) is to ensure a lack of stability in key areas in the world. Deliberately generating conflict in the Middle East, deliberately stimulating a global divide between Muslims and non-Muslims, would create the kind of tension in global affairs which would be of benefit to the US and Western interests – as long as they could secure oil supplies in the meantime (cf. Iraq).
If the oil crisis on the 1970s and 80s is anything to go by, then the US and its partners ought to have been stockpiling oil reserves over the last couple of years despite the high prices of oil – betting that the market will one day be worse and the reserves will be the fall back to ride out the storm.
If there is no conflict in the Middle to focus attentions on, then the world will have to consider the real threat – that China will become the global superpower and the US and its predominantly Western allies will have to learn to march to their tune . . .
Perhaps I am being cynical, but then unfortunately today’s world doesn’t exactly encourage one to be anything other than cynical especially when it comes to politics.
Since the issue of the cartoons broke out I have travelled to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is also reacting very badly to the issue. I felt safe and was happy to be with Muslim clients and colleagues, just as I am in the UAE and around the rest of the Gulf.
You see my Muslim friends and colleagues are my friends and my colleagues – I don’t distinguish them by their religion. We work, laugh and joke together, break bread together and talk about the world and its problems. I would never insult their Prophet (PBUH) or their background just as they would never insult my religion or my culture. Because we respect each other, because we are friends, and most of all because we have taken the time and made the effort to find out a little more about each other than stereotypes and prejudice would ordinarily allow.
And by the way, cartoons are supposed to be funny.
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Bad Moustaches … New Laws Required
I am sitting in the First Class Lounge of Riyadh airport in Saudi Arabia - struggling through the first 30 minutes of a three and a half hour delay to my flight back to Dubai. (I should point out at this stage that the area in which I am sitting is very badly named as it is certainly not first class and very far from the comfortable notions that the word “lounge” usually conjures up . . .indeed “Deodorant Testing and CNN Endurance Zone” may be a more appropriate naming strategy).
Having lived in Greece and now living in the Middle East, facial hair – and in particular moustaches – are nothing new to me. Indeed this symbol of masculinity is something I am completely used to, although I have not succumbed to growing my own - with the exception of a brief spell at university when I convinced myself that leaving my facial hair to grow would instantly transform me into a Robert De Niro / Al Pacino look-alike and give me the kind of unkempt, brutal appeal that I was missing.
The fact that I have since never entertained the idea of growing anything again may be somehow connected to the fact that the result of this ludicrous notion was a rather pathetic, fluffy red half beard that could only be excused on a student living in Scotland in the late 80s . . .
Although it is not for me, I have never had an issue with the principle of facial hair – indeed I have often admired a good moustache or beard when grown and managed well.
However, there are limits – and a brief scan of the room here in Riyadh airport has afforded me some pretty clear indications of where those limits are. You see, sitting around me now are some criminal examples of inappropriate facial hair growth which in the world of which I will be ruler in the future, would be punishable with lengthy imprisonment or just a simple beating.
BMS – or Bad Moustache Syndrome – afflicts many people and from all backgrounds. Examples range from the straightforward “Comedy Moustache” which appears to have been grown for a bet or another humorous purpose (but 9 times out of 10 sadly ends up being a serious effort) to the plain pathetic “Teutonic Weed” so beloved of German students backpacking around the world in unpleasantly tight leather trousers and rucksacks (not that there are many of these in my Riyadh Airport enclosure…).
But there are other varieties which can move you to tears or laughter instantly depending on your mood. Let me share a small selection with you:
1. Adolf Lipper – why, oh why, despite being some 50 years after the fall of Nazi Germany, does anyone think that a Hitler Moustache is EVER going to be fashionable or appealing?
2. Five O’Clock Shadow ‘Tache – here we are working on the principal that the full five o’clock shadow (or just plain unshaven for two days) look that was popularized in the 1980’s by such stunning examples of masculinity as George Michael, would look somehow better if confined to just the top lip. Is this a kind of new millennium post modernist ironic attempt at minimalism or is it just atrocious facial hair . . . Hint: It looks crap and like you can’t grow a real moustache – so shave it off. Now.
3. The Four Inch Crumb Collector – yup, this is one of those preposterously large moustaches which would appear to have no other reason to exist other than to collect small items of food – presumably with the idea of consuming them later on. These moustaches are often worn completely out of proportion with the rest of the face or indeed the owner and as a result look especially bad.
4. The Old Lady – as you may have guessed, these are the moustaches which are seen on women, usually old women. I don’t think I need to devote any further time to this variety as its lack of appeal is self evident.
5. The YOY – no not Year on Year, but Why Oh Why . . . you must have seen them. Perfectly pleasant looking gentlemen with a nice, youthful, fresh-faced look – who then go and trash it completely with a really bad ‘tache. There is just no explanation for this other than sustained drug abuse, mental imbalance or a bizarre religious conviction.
And the list could go on . . .
Bad moustaches are worse than bad body odour. I mean, bad body odour is something which you suffer from at a distance of up to say two feet from the person who stinks – but a bad ‘tache can hit you at up to 100 feet away or more. Not good, and I think society would be better if rid of these facially irresponsible offenders.
My proposal would involve a corporate social responsibility campaign sponsored by Gillette. Free donations of razors and mirrors to those who need them, and lessons on how to “shave it off” would be made available by the giant of the shaving world.
But this would not be enough. There should also be a deterrent to ensure that this kind of offense is avoided in the first place.
‘Tache Tax is one option. Bad Moustaches would be taxed by the authorities and the proceeds donated to the needy and those in ‘tache shock (the witnessing of extreme Bad Moustache Syndrome which leaves victims traumatized for many years). This ‘Tache Tax could be accompanied by an equal incentive programme which would encourage the growth of responsible, non-offensive facial hair – donations and grants to those few who get it right.
Some money from ‘tache tax could also be channeled into research into BMS. Entire medical and psychiatric units would be able to get to the bottom of this phenomenon and provide the world with a solution which may involve therapy or perhaps genetic modification – depending on the severity of the individual problem.
There will, however, always be a few who get away. These persistent offenders will not be changed by therapy or charity. They need a Short Sharp Shave and some time in jail – with enforced shaving every day. Repeat offenders failing to shape up could be forced to have their upper lip hair removed by laser and then have a “nice” moustache tattooed onto their top lip in replacement . . .
In terms of the rest of my policies for "My World", they go as follows:
Along with Bad Moustaches, I will also be banning Comedy / Novelty Mobile Phone Ringtones, CNN Presenters (with one or two exceptions), the French, Children on Planes and in Supermarkets, drivers of small Toyotas, Traffic Wherever I am Driving, several American Presidents, Plastic Cheese, New Labour, “Marketing Speak”, cinema Hot Dogs, Women who ask if they “look fat in this”, Crown Green Bowling, 14 year old Management Consultants who earn 14 times as much as me, Bulgarian toilets, Czech “cuisine”, queues and Riyadh airport.
The death penalty will be a possibility for all of the above offences and absolutely mandatory for all people who fart on planes.
Having lived in Greece and now living in the Middle East, facial hair – and in particular moustaches – are nothing new to me. Indeed this symbol of masculinity is something I am completely used to, although I have not succumbed to growing my own - with the exception of a brief spell at university when I convinced myself that leaving my facial hair to grow would instantly transform me into a Robert De Niro / Al Pacino look-alike and give me the kind of unkempt, brutal appeal that I was missing.
The fact that I have since never entertained the idea of growing anything again may be somehow connected to the fact that the result of this ludicrous notion was a rather pathetic, fluffy red half beard that could only be excused on a student living in Scotland in the late 80s . . .
Although it is not for me, I have never had an issue with the principle of facial hair – indeed I have often admired a good moustache or beard when grown and managed well.
However, there are limits – and a brief scan of the room here in Riyadh airport has afforded me some pretty clear indications of where those limits are. You see, sitting around me now are some criminal examples of inappropriate facial hair growth which in the world of which I will be ruler in the future, would be punishable with lengthy imprisonment or just a simple beating.
BMS – or Bad Moustache Syndrome – afflicts many people and from all backgrounds. Examples range from the straightforward “Comedy Moustache” which appears to have been grown for a bet or another humorous purpose (but 9 times out of 10 sadly ends up being a serious effort) to the plain pathetic “Teutonic Weed” so beloved of German students backpacking around the world in unpleasantly tight leather trousers and rucksacks (not that there are many of these in my Riyadh Airport enclosure…).
But there are other varieties which can move you to tears or laughter instantly depending on your mood. Let me share a small selection with you:
1. Adolf Lipper – why, oh why, despite being some 50 years after the fall of Nazi Germany, does anyone think that a Hitler Moustache is EVER going to be fashionable or appealing?
2. Five O’Clock Shadow ‘Tache – here we are working on the principal that the full five o’clock shadow (or just plain unshaven for two days) look that was popularized in the 1980’s by such stunning examples of masculinity as George Michael, would look somehow better if confined to just the top lip. Is this a kind of new millennium post modernist ironic attempt at minimalism or is it just atrocious facial hair . . . Hint: It looks crap and like you can’t grow a real moustache – so shave it off. Now.
3. The Four Inch Crumb Collector – yup, this is one of those preposterously large moustaches which would appear to have no other reason to exist other than to collect small items of food – presumably with the idea of consuming them later on. These moustaches are often worn completely out of proportion with the rest of the face or indeed the owner and as a result look especially bad.
4. The Old Lady – as you may have guessed, these are the moustaches which are seen on women, usually old women. I don’t think I need to devote any further time to this variety as its lack of appeal is self evident.
5. The YOY – no not Year on Year, but Why Oh Why . . . you must have seen them. Perfectly pleasant looking gentlemen with a nice, youthful, fresh-faced look – who then go and trash it completely with a really bad ‘tache. There is just no explanation for this other than sustained drug abuse, mental imbalance or a bizarre religious conviction.
And the list could go on . . .
Bad moustaches are worse than bad body odour. I mean, bad body odour is something which you suffer from at a distance of up to say two feet from the person who stinks – but a bad ‘tache can hit you at up to 100 feet away or more. Not good, and I think society would be better if rid of these facially irresponsible offenders.
My proposal would involve a corporate social responsibility campaign sponsored by Gillette. Free donations of razors and mirrors to those who need them, and lessons on how to “shave it off” would be made available by the giant of the shaving world.
But this would not be enough. There should also be a deterrent to ensure that this kind of offense is avoided in the first place.
‘Tache Tax is one option. Bad Moustaches would be taxed by the authorities and the proceeds donated to the needy and those in ‘tache shock (the witnessing of extreme Bad Moustache Syndrome which leaves victims traumatized for many years). This ‘Tache Tax could be accompanied by an equal incentive programme which would encourage the growth of responsible, non-offensive facial hair – donations and grants to those few who get it right.
Some money from ‘tache tax could also be channeled into research into BMS. Entire medical and psychiatric units would be able to get to the bottom of this phenomenon and provide the world with a solution which may involve therapy or perhaps genetic modification – depending on the severity of the individual problem.
There will, however, always be a few who get away. These persistent offenders will not be changed by therapy or charity. They need a Short Sharp Shave and some time in jail – with enforced shaving every day. Repeat offenders failing to shape up could be forced to have their upper lip hair removed by laser and then have a “nice” moustache tattooed onto their top lip in replacement . . .
In terms of the rest of my policies for "My World", they go as follows:
Along with Bad Moustaches, I will also be banning Comedy / Novelty Mobile Phone Ringtones, CNN Presenters (with one or two exceptions), the French, Children on Planes and in Supermarkets, drivers of small Toyotas, Traffic Wherever I am Driving, several American Presidents, Plastic Cheese, New Labour, “Marketing Speak”, cinema Hot Dogs, Women who ask if they “look fat in this”, Crown Green Bowling, 14 year old Management Consultants who earn 14 times as much as me, Bulgarian toilets, Czech “cuisine”, queues and Riyadh airport.
The death penalty will be a possibility for all of the above offences and absolutely mandatory for all people who fart on planes.
Friday, November 11, 2005
Bombs & Bravery in Jordan
There are not many occasions that I can remember where I have been left speechless. There are also not many occasions I can remember where something that has no proximity or immediacy to me moves me to tears. The bombings in Jordan on Wednesday of this week were one such time.
Al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility for this sickening crime which will be added to their long list of travesties and tragedies.
Today there are 56 families who are missing one of their members and many hundreds more who have lost friends or have someone who was severely injured in the blasts. I have staff in my offices across the Middle East who knew people who were killed.
I spoke to three clients yesterday about the bombings. One lost a cousin, one his old friend from his university days and the other lost two of her closest friends in the bombings. Everyone in the Middle East has been touched by this appalling and cowardly attack.
Two of my staff were in Amman to run a major press conference for a large international American client in the Grand Hyatt. The event was a great success and fortunately was concluded a few hours before the bombs went off. If they had exploded earlier we would have lost many people from our firm and our client’s company, as well as journalists.
Later that evening, one of my team – a Jordanian who now works for my firm in Dubai - met up with one her best friends in the lobby of the Grand Hyatt hotel. After she said goodbye to him, they walked off in separate directions in the lobby. He towards the bar, she towards the entrance. 15 seconds later the bomb exploded and he was dead. My colleague was miraculously unhurt and lived – only to turn around and see the death and destruction just feet away including the remains of her friend.
Instead of breaking down, she started to find clients and journalists and assist them in their evacuation of the hotel. She then spent the next 10 hours arranging for new hotels, flights and cars to the airport. A group of Egyptian journalists refused to co-operate and told her that they were not going to go anywhere until she – the PR person – went back into the hotel and got their bags and personal belongings. They even started to abuse her when she explained that the police would not allow anyone back into the hotel. Idiots.
When I heard of the bombs back in Dubai – just 30 minutes after they had gone off – I spent the next three hours on the phone co-ordinating with my people across the Middle East to check on staff, clients and others. The girl who lost her friend in the blast was the last person I managed to reach and I was very concerned.
She was in tears and in a state of shock – She told me about her friend who was killed and I gave her my condolences. I had imagined that she was at home with her family by now so I rang off as I did not want to intrude into her privacy at such a terrible time. I didn’t know that actually this was just the beginning of her night and that she would spend the next eight hours or so ensuring the safety of others including the ignorant and intolerable Egyptian journalists.
Another member of my staff was at the Days Inn hotel, which was also blown up. She too was miraculously unhurt, although her car - which was parked outside the hotel - is now a windowless convertible as a result of the blast.
When I learnt of the bravery of my colleague in the Grand Hyatt I was simply astonished and totally humbled. I cannot imagine the feelings one has when one sees one’s best friend blown up and killed, seconds after saying goodbye to them. To see one’s home city brought to its knees with death and chaos all around. And then to spend the night taking care of others and making sure they are safe. Her bravery has been recognized within the company at a global level and indeed by the CEO of the WPP group - which owns our firm -who wrote her a personal letter. At my request we will also be making a donation to the appropriate fund that will help the victims of the blasts in Amman.
There were of course other tragedies in Amman. Ashraf Mohammed and his bride Nadia Al-Alami were celebrating their marriage with 250 guests in the ballroom of the Radisson hotel – scene of the worst blast which went off when the wedding party was taking place. Both bride and groom were injured and each lost their fathers. To begin your married life in this way is truly awful – and for the bomb to claim the lives of their respective father-in-laws was also tragic – (particularly as the mother-in-laws were unhurt!).
Jordan was targeted for three main reasons. Its close relationship with the US – politically and economically is perhaps the first reason. The second that it has maintained much closer relationships with Israel than the other Arab nations and this is seen as a betrayal. Finally, it is a hub now for mainly American and other foreign forces who use Amman and Jordan as a “pied a terre” for their activities in Iraq which the country borders. The attack in this sense was no surprise as it has been widely anticipated that the country would be targeted, and only the hitherto tireless work of the efficient intelligence service in Jordan has protected the Hashemite Kingdom from Al Qaeda until this week.
The Jordanian Royal family are Hashemites. This means they are blood descendants of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and yet evidently Al Qaeda do not feel they are “Islamic enough”. This goes to show that actually Al Qaeda is nothing to do with Islam. These attacks and others around the world have nothing to do with Islam or the Muslim people. These are acts of pure terror without rhyme or reason and there are no excuses or ways of defending them.
This is the world we live in. New York, Madrid, London, Bali, Jordan, Egypt and so on. Nowhere is safe from this scourge and no-one can predict where next. Death and mourning in this part of the world are sadly so commonplace in the last hundred years or more, that society and communities have developed their own mechanisms for dealing with it. The Westerners are beginning to learn how to do this too. Not lessons that we would hope for in the 21st century.
It is God’s will say some, perhaps to remove the need to question the mindlessness and brutal unfairness of such early deaths in such tragic circumstances. Maybe this makes it easier.
The bravery, courage, commitment and strength demonstrated by my colleague in Amman on Wednesday and indeed many other Jordanians, made me realize how pathetic most of the problems we all worry about on a daily basis are. I was and am humbled by her and her actions.
I hope you will be too.
Al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility for this sickening crime which will be added to their long list of travesties and tragedies.
Today there are 56 families who are missing one of their members and many hundreds more who have lost friends or have someone who was severely injured in the blasts. I have staff in my offices across the Middle East who knew people who were killed.
I spoke to three clients yesterday about the bombings. One lost a cousin, one his old friend from his university days and the other lost two of her closest friends in the bombings. Everyone in the Middle East has been touched by this appalling and cowardly attack.
Two of my staff were in Amman to run a major press conference for a large international American client in the Grand Hyatt. The event was a great success and fortunately was concluded a few hours before the bombs went off. If they had exploded earlier we would have lost many people from our firm and our client’s company, as well as journalists.
Later that evening, one of my team – a Jordanian who now works for my firm in Dubai - met up with one her best friends in the lobby of the Grand Hyatt hotel. After she said goodbye to him, they walked off in separate directions in the lobby. He towards the bar, she towards the entrance. 15 seconds later the bomb exploded and he was dead. My colleague was miraculously unhurt and lived – only to turn around and see the death and destruction just feet away including the remains of her friend.
Instead of breaking down, she started to find clients and journalists and assist them in their evacuation of the hotel. She then spent the next 10 hours arranging for new hotels, flights and cars to the airport. A group of Egyptian journalists refused to co-operate and told her that they were not going to go anywhere until she – the PR person – went back into the hotel and got their bags and personal belongings. They even started to abuse her when she explained that the police would not allow anyone back into the hotel. Idiots.
When I heard of the bombs back in Dubai – just 30 minutes after they had gone off – I spent the next three hours on the phone co-ordinating with my people across the Middle East to check on staff, clients and others. The girl who lost her friend in the blast was the last person I managed to reach and I was very concerned.
She was in tears and in a state of shock – She told me about her friend who was killed and I gave her my condolences. I had imagined that she was at home with her family by now so I rang off as I did not want to intrude into her privacy at such a terrible time. I didn’t know that actually this was just the beginning of her night and that she would spend the next eight hours or so ensuring the safety of others including the ignorant and intolerable Egyptian journalists.
Another member of my staff was at the Days Inn hotel, which was also blown up. She too was miraculously unhurt, although her car - which was parked outside the hotel - is now a windowless convertible as a result of the blast.
When I learnt of the bravery of my colleague in the Grand Hyatt I was simply astonished and totally humbled. I cannot imagine the feelings one has when one sees one’s best friend blown up and killed, seconds after saying goodbye to them. To see one’s home city brought to its knees with death and chaos all around. And then to spend the night taking care of others and making sure they are safe. Her bravery has been recognized within the company at a global level and indeed by the CEO of the WPP group - which owns our firm -who wrote her a personal letter. At my request we will also be making a donation to the appropriate fund that will help the victims of the blasts in Amman.
There were of course other tragedies in Amman. Ashraf Mohammed and his bride Nadia Al-Alami were celebrating their marriage with 250 guests in the ballroom of the Radisson hotel – scene of the worst blast which went off when the wedding party was taking place. Both bride and groom were injured and each lost their fathers. To begin your married life in this way is truly awful – and for the bomb to claim the lives of their respective father-in-laws was also tragic – (particularly as the mother-in-laws were unhurt!).
Jordan was targeted for three main reasons. Its close relationship with the US – politically and economically is perhaps the first reason. The second that it has maintained much closer relationships with Israel than the other Arab nations and this is seen as a betrayal. Finally, it is a hub now for mainly American and other foreign forces who use Amman and Jordan as a “pied a terre” for their activities in Iraq which the country borders. The attack in this sense was no surprise as it has been widely anticipated that the country would be targeted, and only the hitherto tireless work of the efficient intelligence service in Jordan has protected the Hashemite Kingdom from Al Qaeda until this week.
The Jordanian Royal family are Hashemites. This means they are blood descendants of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and yet evidently Al Qaeda do not feel they are “Islamic enough”. This goes to show that actually Al Qaeda is nothing to do with Islam. These attacks and others around the world have nothing to do with Islam or the Muslim people. These are acts of pure terror without rhyme or reason and there are no excuses or ways of defending them.
This is the world we live in. New York, Madrid, London, Bali, Jordan, Egypt and so on. Nowhere is safe from this scourge and no-one can predict where next. Death and mourning in this part of the world are sadly so commonplace in the last hundred years or more, that society and communities have developed their own mechanisms for dealing with it. The Westerners are beginning to learn how to do this too. Not lessons that we would hope for in the 21st century.
It is God’s will say some, perhaps to remove the need to question the mindlessness and brutal unfairness of such early deaths in such tragic circumstances. Maybe this makes it easier.
The bravery, courage, commitment and strength demonstrated by my colleague in Amman on Wednesday and indeed many other Jordanians, made me realize how pathetic most of the problems we all worry about on a daily basis are. I was and am humbled by her and her actions.
I hope you will be too.
Sunday, October 2, 2005
Ships of the Desert . . .
There was a joke when I was teenager which went something like this:
Q: Why are camels called the ships of the desert?
A: Because they are full of Arab semen . . .
Geddit?
Today’s Gulf News, one of the leading English language daily newspapers, carried the following story on its website about a court case from the northern Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah:
Driver jailed for bestiality
By Nasouh Nazzal, Staff Reporter
Ras Al Khaimah: A man has been sentenced to three months in jail after pleading guilty to charges of bestiality.
The camel involved in the case is to be put down in accordance with Islamic law.
A court official said the Bangladeshi, who worked as a driver, had been spotted going into his employer's barn on a regular basis.
His employer became suspicious as his duties did not involve him dealing with animals.
The official said the employer, a UAE national, followed his driver into the barn one day and saw him starting to have sex with a female camel.
The owner lost his temper and started beating him. He then took him to the police station to press charges.
The official said the driver confessed to police that he used to have sex with one particular camel.
The police arrested him and the case was referred to the Public Prosecution.
The official added the man told the prosecution that he had fallen in love with the camel and had sex with the animal.
The emirate's Criminal Court sentenced him on Wednesday to three months in jail, to be followed by deportation.
It also stated that the camel be put down as its meat would now be tainted.
The animal will be put down at the emirate's slaughterhouse, a representative from the Public Prosecution will be in attendance.
In case you think I am making this up, click on the following link to see the original story on the Gulf News website:
http://www.gulfnews.com/Articles/NationNF.asp?ArticleID=184720
So, going back to the joke of my childhood, it would appear that Bangladeshi is a more appropriate adjective than Arab!
Of course this story is rather unpleasant all round. Back in the UK we are used to hearing of tall tales about Welsh sheep farmers (although I cannot ever recall a newspaper story or a criminal prosecution confirming what was bandied about as part of a rather puerile national stereotype). And indeed, there were the legends of Greek mountain shepherds and their goats which were in a similar vein . . .
The story does raise some interesting questions – some of which I won’t go into here as they relate to biology and gymnastics – but one that has been bothering me since reading this article is the fate of the camel . . .
This poor animal, which one must assume was at the very least an unwitting (and I suspect unwilling) partner in this bestial act, is immediately sentenced to death, while the Bangladeshi offender is given a rather pathetic 3 month sentence in jail, followed by deportation.
Another question which has been giving me trouble is the confession of the offender that he “had fallen in love with the animal”. Without wanting to get into the deep philosophical discussion of “what is love” – it strikes me as somewhat farfetched to claim to have fallen in love with a camel (or any animal for that matter) and more to the point, how did this happen on the basis that communicating with camels is not a qualification that even the best linguist can claim, let alone a Bangladeshi driver . . .
I wonder what The Sun newspaper in the UK would make of this story in terms of a headline?
(I apologize in advance! )
Camel Hump-ing!
Or perhaps . . .
Dromedary Desire Derails Desperate Driver
Or perhaps . . .
Barnstorming Bangladeshi Banged Up For Bestiality
Or finally
The Camel Sutra
Q: Why are camels called the ships of the desert?
A: Because they are full of Arab semen . . .
Geddit?
Today’s Gulf News, one of the leading English language daily newspapers, carried the following story on its website about a court case from the northern Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah:
Driver jailed for bestiality
By Nasouh Nazzal, Staff Reporter
Ras Al Khaimah: A man has been sentenced to three months in jail after pleading guilty to charges of bestiality.
The camel involved in the case is to be put down in accordance with Islamic law.
A court official said the Bangladeshi, who worked as a driver, had been spotted going into his employer's barn on a regular basis.
His employer became suspicious as his duties did not involve him dealing with animals.
The official said the employer, a UAE national, followed his driver into the barn one day and saw him starting to have sex with a female camel.
The owner lost his temper and started beating him. He then took him to the police station to press charges.
The official said the driver confessed to police that he used to have sex with one particular camel.
The police arrested him and the case was referred to the Public Prosecution.
The official added the man told the prosecution that he had fallen in love with the camel and had sex with the animal.
The emirate's Criminal Court sentenced him on Wednesday to three months in jail, to be followed by deportation.
It also stated that the camel be put down as its meat would now be tainted.
The animal will be put down at the emirate's slaughterhouse, a representative from the Public Prosecution will be in attendance.
In case you think I am making this up, click on the following link to see the original story on the Gulf News website:
http://www.gulfnews.com/Articles/NationNF.asp?ArticleID=184720
So, going back to the joke of my childhood, it would appear that Bangladeshi is a more appropriate adjective than Arab!
Of course this story is rather unpleasant all round. Back in the UK we are used to hearing of tall tales about Welsh sheep farmers (although I cannot ever recall a newspaper story or a criminal prosecution confirming what was bandied about as part of a rather puerile national stereotype). And indeed, there were the legends of Greek mountain shepherds and their goats which were in a similar vein . . .
The story does raise some interesting questions – some of which I won’t go into here as they relate to biology and gymnastics – but one that has been bothering me since reading this article is the fate of the camel . . .
This poor animal, which one must assume was at the very least an unwitting (and I suspect unwilling) partner in this bestial act, is immediately sentenced to death, while the Bangladeshi offender is given a rather pathetic 3 month sentence in jail, followed by deportation.
Another question which has been giving me trouble is the confession of the offender that he “had fallen in love with the animal”. Without wanting to get into the deep philosophical discussion of “what is love” – it strikes me as somewhat farfetched to claim to have fallen in love with a camel (or any animal for that matter) and more to the point, how did this happen on the basis that communicating with camels is not a qualification that even the best linguist can claim, let alone a Bangladeshi driver . . .
I wonder what The Sun newspaper in the UK would make of this story in terms of a headline?
(I apologize in advance! )
Camel Hump-ing!
Or perhaps . . .
Dromedary Desire Derails Desperate Driver
Or perhaps . . .
Barnstorming Bangladeshi Banged Up For Bestiality
Or finally
The Camel Sutra
Friday, September 30, 2005
Food, Glorious Food!
Arab television kind of leaves me cold - and it isn’t just that I don’t understand the language. It’s really about why most TV internationally fails to hit the mark when compared to the BBC - it just isn't very good.
Naturally, I have subscribed to a cable TV package here in the UAE which provides me with news, movies and documentaries to while away those boiling summer evenings, when it is just too damn hot to go outside. After largely ignoring the ubiquitous CNN and MTV offerings, my cable box seems to be stuck on one channel for about 90% of the time - the wonderful, indulgent, decadent BBC Food Channel. . .
This is cable TV at its best - a 24 hour TV channel devoted to just one thing. Food. Yup, BBC Food Channel does just exactly what it says on the can. It brings food, gastronomy and culinary chaos to my screen every hour of the day and every day of the week. I like to think of it as gastro-pornography.
You know that watching it now and again probably isn’t too bad. But, you can’t help watching it all of the time - and I mean all of the time! It becomes an addiction, a craving which, until you have had your fill of Lancashire Hotpot, Bouillabaisse, Dim Sum, Thai Green Curry, Asparagus Risotto and Shrimp Tempura, you cannot resist.
Does the Food Channel inspire me to cook? Well. . . no. Does it inspire me to go to new restaurants? No again. In the same way pornography does not inspire you to become a better lover or seek out new sexual partners, the Food Channel is about living vicariously, about voyeurism and about acts of unashamed gastronomic indulgence. A spectator sport par excellence and without any shopping, chopping or washing up.
Like pornography it is, of course, artificial, fake, unreal. You, the viewer, cannot smell the food, taste the flavours, or feel the textures. Just like pornography, where one has to rely on the grunts and groans of the “actors” to communicate stimulation and satisfaction, on the Food Channel the viewer is reliant on the expressive gestures and gasps of the presenter or Chef to be convinced that everything tastes good.
Suspension of disbelief is also a major feature - just as some of the more bizarre positions and contortions featured in blue movies look like they might be rather painful, some of the stranger recipes on the Food Channel programmes (chicken entrails in vegetable broth springs to mind) look and sound disgusting. However, just as the smiles of pleasure in porn flicks convince one otherwise, so does the cheesy grin of the TV chef as he puts the entrails in his mouth - and yes, the TV chef does swallow . . .
TV chefs are the new celebrities of the modern generation - with the same or similar levels of recognition as singers, actors, politicians and the business elite. They influence fashions, opinions, purchasing behaviour and the way we view the world.
In the microcosm that is the world of TV cuisine, we meet food liberals, food communists and food fascists. We meet modernists, traditionalists, futurists and the avant garde. We meet the old, the young, the middle aged. Some are rigorously scientific, some are slapdash improvisers. Some are pioneering, open minded experimenters - others are treading the well worn paths of gastronomy, but simply wearing new shoes. To coin a phrase and risk a pun - food TV is the melting pot with something for everyone.
Jamie, Delia, Antony, Nigella et al are our friends, our guides, our leaders. Follow their instructions and the world will be a better place. We will be happy, we will be satisfied and of course we will be the envy of our friends. Their books sell more copies than the Bible in any given week and are probably read and consulted more religiously.
In the MTV world, food has replaced sex - easier to plan, often more satisfying and there are no taboos or restrictions. And if you don’t have time to cook, then you can always get your jollies by watching someone else do it better than you ever could on TV.
What has this to do with Arabia I hear you ask? Well perhaps not much, other than the fact that I haven’t seen any TV Cooking programmes on any of the Arabic channels and the vast array of restaurants here in the UAE are packed with people merrily enjoying the real thing, with doubtless many more people practicing “safe food” in the privacy of their homes and behind closed doors.
Having said that, His Highness Gordon Ramsay (Chef Extraordinaire and full blown gastro-celebrity) has recently arrived in Dubai, grabbing the front cover of Time Out magazine talking about guess what - food!
I suppose now it is only a matter of time before I start tuning in to the Al-Jazeera Food Channel to get my pleasure of an evening . . .
Naturally, I have subscribed to a cable TV package here in the UAE which provides me with news, movies and documentaries to while away those boiling summer evenings, when it is just too damn hot to go outside. After largely ignoring the ubiquitous CNN and MTV offerings, my cable box seems to be stuck on one channel for about 90% of the time - the wonderful, indulgent, decadent BBC Food Channel. . .
This is cable TV at its best - a 24 hour TV channel devoted to just one thing. Food. Yup, BBC Food Channel does just exactly what it says on the can. It brings food, gastronomy and culinary chaos to my screen every hour of the day and every day of the week. I like to think of it as gastro-pornography.
You know that watching it now and again probably isn’t too bad. But, you can’t help watching it all of the time - and I mean all of the time! It becomes an addiction, a craving which, until you have had your fill of Lancashire Hotpot, Bouillabaisse, Dim Sum, Thai Green Curry, Asparagus Risotto and Shrimp Tempura, you cannot resist.
Does the Food Channel inspire me to cook? Well. . . no. Does it inspire me to go to new restaurants? No again. In the same way pornography does not inspire you to become a better lover or seek out new sexual partners, the Food Channel is about living vicariously, about voyeurism and about acts of unashamed gastronomic indulgence. A spectator sport par excellence and without any shopping, chopping or washing up.
Like pornography it is, of course, artificial, fake, unreal. You, the viewer, cannot smell the food, taste the flavours, or feel the textures. Just like pornography, where one has to rely on the grunts and groans of the “actors” to communicate stimulation and satisfaction, on the Food Channel the viewer is reliant on the expressive gestures and gasps of the presenter or Chef to be convinced that everything tastes good.
Suspension of disbelief is also a major feature - just as some of the more bizarre positions and contortions featured in blue movies look like they might be rather painful, some of the stranger recipes on the Food Channel programmes (chicken entrails in vegetable broth springs to mind) look and sound disgusting. However, just as the smiles of pleasure in porn flicks convince one otherwise, so does the cheesy grin of the TV chef as he puts the entrails in his mouth - and yes, the TV chef does swallow . . .
TV chefs are the new celebrities of the modern generation - with the same or similar levels of recognition as singers, actors, politicians and the business elite. They influence fashions, opinions, purchasing behaviour and the way we view the world.
In the microcosm that is the world of TV cuisine, we meet food liberals, food communists and food fascists. We meet modernists, traditionalists, futurists and the avant garde. We meet the old, the young, the middle aged. Some are rigorously scientific, some are slapdash improvisers. Some are pioneering, open minded experimenters - others are treading the well worn paths of gastronomy, but simply wearing new shoes. To coin a phrase and risk a pun - food TV is the melting pot with something for everyone.
Jamie, Delia, Antony, Nigella et al are our friends, our guides, our leaders. Follow their instructions and the world will be a better place. We will be happy, we will be satisfied and of course we will be the envy of our friends. Their books sell more copies than the Bible in any given week and are probably read and consulted more religiously.
In the MTV world, food has replaced sex - easier to plan, often more satisfying and there are no taboos or restrictions. And if you don’t have time to cook, then you can always get your jollies by watching someone else do it better than you ever could on TV.
What has this to do with Arabia I hear you ask? Well perhaps not much, other than the fact that I haven’t seen any TV Cooking programmes on any of the Arabic channels and the vast array of restaurants here in the UAE are packed with people merrily enjoying the real thing, with doubtless many more people practicing “safe food” in the privacy of their homes and behind closed doors.
Having said that, His Highness Gordon Ramsay (Chef Extraordinaire and full blown gastro-celebrity) has recently arrived in Dubai, grabbing the front cover of Time Out magazine talking about guess what - food!
I suppose now it is only a matter of time before I start tuning in to the Al-Jazeera Food Channel to get my pleasure of an evening . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)