The Shotgun Blog
« SCHREIBER SHOCKER | Main | Iran's Taliban Connection »
Thursday, November 29, 2007
British Teacher Gets 15 Days
Why? Because her class named a teddy bear Mohammad.
From Reuters:
A British teacher accused of insulting Muslims after her class called a teddy bear Mohammad was found guilty and jailed for 15 days, a defence lawyer said on Thursday.
Gillian Gibbons, 54, was ordered to be deported after she had completed her sentence.
"She was found guilty of insulting religion and the sentence is 15 days (in jail) and deportation," defence lawyer Ali Ajib said after the trial in a Khartoum courtroom, which lasted less than a day.
In London, the British Foreign Office said it was "extremely disappointed" with the verdict. "The Sudanese ambassador will be called in this evening to explain this decision," a Foreign Office spokeswoman said.
Robert Boulos, head of Unity high school where Gibbons worked, said: "We are happy with the verdict. It is fair. There were a lot of political pressures and attention."
He added: "We will be very sad to lose her."
Asked what he thought of the verdict, the head of Gibbons's defence team, Kamal al-Jazouli, said: "It was not bad."
Gibbons was charged on Wednesday with insulting Islam, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs because of the toy's name. Under Sudan's penal code, she could have faced 40 lashes, a fine, or up to one year in jail.
Posted by Leah Dowe on November 29, 2007 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e54f91235c8833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference British Teacher Gets 15 Days:
Comments
I still think the verdict is farcical - 15 days in jail for a teddybear? But compared to the alternative, she's lucky to have made it out unscarred (literally). I hope people will now rethink their policies of trying to elevate these backward, tribal, camel-fellating cave dwellers. Until such time as they choose to embrace civilization and the responsibilities that acoompany it, they are to be avoided like a disease. After all, they are just as deadly.
RG
Posted by: RightGirl | 2007-11-29 1:14:32 PM
"they are to be avoided like a disease"
Unfortunately, they won't allow us this luxury because their intent is to convert, enslave, or kill us.
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-29 1:30:55 PM
Insulting a religion?
If they cared a tiny bit about Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Budhism, or any other religion on the face of the planet, but their own, then maybe their actions might have been real. They burn all other religious texts but their own. Why if you have even been to Israel, they will not permit you into their country.
They are not interested in whether it insults a religion--as a religion cannot be offended in and of itself, but how they wish to impose their religion onto all other people. They are not interested in whether it is hateful--because the freaking thing was a stuffed fake animal--not a real one.
The only reason why she got 15 days instead of 40 lashes was because of how rediculous it is--they were getting a free teacher, and then punnishing her for equating a warm and fuzzy with a pedophilic monster. Now, hopefully the children will learn the truth--that they are monsters who are impossing their religion.
I agree--they should be avoided at all costs. And then they whine and complain that the rest of the world has more money than they have. Well from what it appears, mere contact with that rubbish is dangerous to one's health. When you think about what happenned to Zahra Kazemi, why they might even rape her in jail, and send her back with psychological wounds as big as football stadiums.
Look--they have killed millions of people for their religion--so now you can see on what basis they have killed all those people--because they wanted the freedom to name their teddy bear whatever they wanted.
Just say NO to Sudan!
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-29 1:33:25 PM
Seems like the Sudanese caved to political pressure in the sense that they were too afraid to deliver the lash.
But just remember, this teacher got off lightly only because she attracted the attention of the world and Bless her for it.
But there are thousands of other women just like her who are tortured and killed for doing the same thing.
Rightgirl is right on. These people are a disease. And so are the people who defend and support them. They are nothing but disease carriers.
Epsi
Posted by: Epsilon | 2007-11-29 1:35:46 PM
At least they didn't taze her.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-11-29 1:52:45 PM
I don't recall hearing anything from the womens groups on this outrage. How about the teacher's unions? Anyone female at all.
Yet these feminazis who run our school system are quick to have Islam appreciation days and the like.
Muslims everywhere need to be shunned, not hired, not rented to not done business with. We need to reject them entirely until they stop rejecting everything that is not them. the so-called moderates need to stand up now!
Why anyone would choose to go to a Muslim country at this time, for any reason other than to shoot the worst of them IE Iraq, Afghanistan, is beyond me.
Posted by: John | 2007-11-29 1:55:33 PM
The children got off scot-free! This is another opportunity wasted by elders to teach children a lesson, in the name of Islam they should have been lashed or imprisoned too. How else are they going to learn how to be proper little savages?
The Sudanese judiciary should be condemned for failing in their responsibilities to the children.
Posted by: philanthropist | 2007-11-29 1:56:54 PM
Michael Coren went on a tirade today on Toronto radio CFRB about this subject. He suggested we sever all diplomatic ties with this country and stop all aid to them.
I tend to agree with his suggestion.
Posted by: atric | 2007-11-29 3:44:52 PM
atric: why? Sudan did nothing to us.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2007-11-29 4:10:22 PM
I simply don't understand the disproportionate nature of it all. The Sudanese are raping and killing their own, both Muslim and Christian, in Darfur while rioting over a teddy bear in the capital. How do they reconcile these flagrant contradictions? I wish that when these things happened that moderate Muslims would speak out against these heinous practices. I keep being told that such acts do not represent mainstream Islam. Presumably the media are anxious to give us that mainstream point of view. But I don't see it or hear it. Where are the moderates? Are they cowed into silence? Serious pushback from mainstream Islam is far more likely to quell extreme Islamists than the opinions of the rest of us. It's time Islam took charge of cleaning up its own house.
Posted by: John R. Sutherland | 2007-11-29 4:29:15 PM
When will we learn is the question?
Why anyone would consider going to any Muslim led State or Country to teach anything or even help them is beyond common reason.
It can never work. They must be left alone to follow their religion, we cannot possibly change anything about that without harm coming to us. this case is an example.
All-encompassing Islam is all they know, all they live and die for. They will never listen to anyone else they do not deserve or appreciate any help with that attitude.
Let them breed into oblivion, brainwash, fight and kill each other in the name of Islam or whatever. They will not listen to anything coming from the modern, civilizations of the World. They wish to live in the 14th century, so let them.
Any of them coming to our countries should be told to embrace our way of life and laws and be forbidden to return to where they came from. That's where the trouble starts. They keep trekking back and forth, fighting their battles from safe havens, drawing the world into their cesspools.
Enough!
Posted by: Liz J | 2007-11-29 4:52:59 PM
Phil,
We will never know the answer to what happenned to the children, because we are not there to witness.
They were probably smacked around when the journalists left.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-29 5:29:48 PM
John R Sutherland,
They do not consider the ones they are raping and murdering to be their own--which is why it is both ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Why is there a problem?
The people of the North rule and they have impossed Shariah--and the folks of the South have objected to the impossition of Shariah. The people of the South are the ones being killed--primarily blacks who are Christians and/or animists or other minority religions indigenous to Africa. Those who are blacks and Muslim have been sent out of the country and are living in squalid conditions off of welfare monies paid and supplied by the UN, food monies. Their rations were cut in half, from a day's needs p[er day to half, because the UN decided it cost too much. So what you see there is an operation where they are literall weeding out the oposition to Shariah and saving only those blacks who are Muslims, and kicking those folks out. Meanwhile, the Sudanese government keeps saying they can do nothing about the situation--that they are incapable of maintaining the peace and have nothing to do with the killings, rapes and ethnic cleansing.
Then we see what they do to volunteer teachers, and we are surprised? Their aim was probably to get her out of the country--because she was actually teaching something about goodness.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-29 5:46:40 PM
LizJ,
When these governments are getting payment from the oil rich nations--then there is no such thing as breeding into oblivion. By oil rich nations, I am not talking about western oil rich nations.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-29 5:48:29 PM
Liz J
WWII taught us that we can't just sit back and watch the Muslims from afar.
What if, through conquest and religion, they organize into large, powerful blocs. What if with their population growth, they come to outnumber us by an order of magnitude. Some Muslim countries (Pakistan comes to mind) already have nuclear weapons, what if that becomes widespread over the intervening decades.
Are you just going to be watching then?
The current policy has focussed on "bridge-building", guidance, and aid ... however assinine the MSM can make these efforts look. But we mustn't forget what we are really trying to accomplish. We really want to avoid having to fight WWIII with them down the road, by trying to instill in them some basic western values now. And, we hope and pray that those values will take root in time.
It reminds me of current NASA asteroid-impact studies, that suggest using a relatively gentle force, spanning decades, to slowly veer the impact object off-course and away from a disasterous collision with us.
Same basic idea in both cases, methinks.
Posted by: Harph | 2007-11-29 5:50:02 PM
"I wish that when these things happened that moderate Muslims would speak out against these heinous practices."
. . . only to also be killed by the ectremists.
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-29 5:54:32 PM
Quote:
Michael Coren went on a tirade today on Toronto radio CFRB about this subject. He suggested we sever all diplomatic ties with this country and stop all aid to them.
I tend to agree with his suggestion.
Posted by: atric | 29-Nov-07 3:44:52 PM
--------
atric: why? Sudan did nothing to us.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 29-Nov-07 4:10:22 PM
/quotes
-------
They oppose freedom Zeb! How else would you get their attention that they are wrong? Are you ok with their savagery? Believers in the struggle for freedom and the necessity of presenting a common front to oppose tyranny, aren't ok with it.
-------------
Quote:
Let them breed into oblivion, brainwash, fight and kill each other in the name of Islam or whatever. They will not listen to anything coming from the modern, civilizations of the World. They wish to live in the 14th century, so let them....
Posted by: Liz J | 29-Nov-07 4:52:59 PM
/quote
I agree, but as Steyn said, they are out-breeding us, and birth rates will, if you'll pardon the expression, "colour" the West in the future. That is, of course, unless we can successfully counter-attack the Left's unceasing war on the family. And start having more children.
Posted by: Larry | 2007-11-29 6:33:47 PM
John R Sutherland:
this will answer some of your questions about Islam:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=33ADCAA3-1E36-4665-881D-8E6C4F6C8D7B
Posted by: andré | 2007-11-29 6:39:20 PM
What? The religion of peace in the news again...
Posted by: Alain | 2007-11-29 7:19:34 PM
Well, I just hope they keep reporting the truth about these countries...eventually the public opinion on stroking the Muslim ego will swing back to reality.
Posted by: SW | 2007-11-29 7:21:29 PM
In consideration of the above comments asking "where are the moderates", I am reminded of a lawyer joke:
99% of all lawyers^H^H^H^H^H^H^HMuslims give the rest a bad name.
Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-11-29 7:26:23 PM
It is time we started tightening up our immigration from Islamis countries. We would not accept neo-nazis freely so why should we allow this cult of hate and death into the country. if you want to come to Canada you should leave Islam back in the sewer. It is very telling that these children picked mohammud as the name for the teddy bear,it verifies the fact that they are not allowed to do or think anything that is not based on worshipping thier false prophet. Could you imagine a class of 7 year-olds in Canada picking Jesus as the name for a teddy bear? Hell no,we allow our children to have fun. Fun is not allowed in Islam. If you ever watch a stoning,extremely brutal,watch these bastards throw,they all are foaming at the mouth,yelling thier fool heads off,and they throw like little schoolgirls.
Posted by: wwallyj | 2007-11-29 7:53:32 PM
"and they throw like little schoolgirls"
. . . and often AT little schoolgirls.
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-29 7:58:35 PM
Could you imagine a class of 7 year-olds in Canada picking Jesus as the name for a teddy bear? Hell no,we allow our children to have fun.
Posted by: wwallyj | 29-Nov-07 7:53:32 PM
Only problem with this is that Jesus isn't a commen name in English speaking countries (or any country for that matter), while Mohammed (in all it's different forms of spelling) is pretty popular in the Arabic speaking world. Go figure.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2007-11-29 7:59:54 PM
Brent ~
If you get in touch with the webmaster here, have him email me your email address. I have something that I'm sure would interest you - if you are interested.
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-29 8:06:50 PM
Snowrunner. The point I was making is that kids should not be so preoccupied with religious figures at that age. In Canada or any normal country the children would have come up with a name like fluffy or such. Why must you defend this religion of hate?
Posted by: wallyj | 2007-11-29 8:14:57 PM
Snowrunner. The point I was making is that kids should not be so preoccupied with religious figures at that age. In Canada or any normal country the children would have come up with a name like fluffy or such. Why must you defend this religion of hate?
Posted by: wallyj | 29-Nov-07 8:14:57 PM
I don't like any religion, but if you want to attack something then attack it on it's merit (or lack thereof) and not on a name that is common in general populace.
Let's assuem they would have called (in Canada) the bear "Peter", should I then say: "Oh, all these kids are brainwashed by the Christians, obviously they were naming it after St. Peter."
That's as stupid as your remark. They may or may not be religiously indoctrinated, but hanging this on a common first name is pretty thin argument.
And btw, when I was a kid I never gave my stuffed animals any "cutey names", I usually picked real ones of people I knew.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2007-11-29 8:19:15 PM
wallyj ~
. . . because Leftoids will defend anyone that opposes Western values - even mass murderers - but refuse to defend those values themselves.
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-29 8:20:54 PM
Harph- its obvious that they don't want any of our western values. They reject us as being to free wheeling and inventive. They don't recognise that we have any worthwhile values. What they want is our acceptance of their barbarism and they want our knowledge and technology.
Posted by: DML | 2007-11-29 10:08:23 PM
What was described in the interview sounds like islamofacism to me, just described in a different way.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-11-29 10:36:10 PM
John Sutherland's link to Moorthy Muthuswamy was a bit scary. Maybe I misunderstood, but it sounded a lot like how the 1939 Nazis were painting the Jews.
Painted as: The evil within. Incorrigable. Unreformable.
We all know how that turned out.
Does this apply to every Islamic nation on Earth? Are they all like this in your eyes? Egypt? Jordan? Pakistan (nukes and all)? Iran (think back to the Shah of Iran, not the way things are now)? Turkey?
In your view, can we have positive dealings with some Islamic nations, but not others? Or all they all out to assimilate us .. Borg-style nasty?
Is it enough to limit immigration and crack down hard on their "violent protests", or are we talking "final solution" here? Are we going to import the "final solution" to the Islamic Axis, too?
After the bell tolls for Islam, who will it toll for next? (Hint: who has been history's favourite scapegoat for 2000 years?)
And in the end, if we do this, what will have survived? How will we be different than them?
I agree with the frustration voiced in Moorthy Muthuswamy's interview, but I find the sentiment, analysis, and implied solutions very worrying.
Posted by: Harph | 2007-11-29 11:51:13 PM
It should read export, not import. My bad.
Also, if Moorthy Muthuswamy's views are reflected in mainstream India, then maybe those 850 million Indian Hindus should rise up and show us how it's done. They're still an 85% majority in their own country.
It looks to me like he was looking for leadership from the West. (i.e., everyone watches, and Monday-morning quarterbacks, while the U.S., and her sparse allies of the day, do the heavy lifting.)
Maybe it's time for other nations to provide some leadership too. India is a democracy, Hindu is a venerable and respected religion, 850 million people can raise a nice army, plus they have nukes. Let them show us the way, for a change.
Posted by: Harph | 2007-11-30 12:09:21 AM
I think that Muthuswamy tells it like it is.
Muthuswamy: Because the political Islamic movement is driven by a conquest-oriented medieval ideology and outlook, it behaves like a “germ”. Dialogue or accommodation is simply not possible. Second, this movement is entrenched among Muslim populations and importantly, is networked, with multiple power centers or nodes. This means classical approach of predominantly using diplomacy and/or military force, along with aid is not effective. This may be the reason why our traditional Think Tanks are struggling to come up with a coherent policy response that our political leaders could rely on.
We are fighting this war with a number of preconceived notions. I have debunked many critical ones in my book. Let me mention a few (within the brackets are my retorts):
Democracy is the solution to radical Islam. (No, in order for functional democracies to take root, political Islam must first be neutralized.);
A widely practiced religion must have a strong moderate component. (No again, free wealth can create conditions for complete domination of extremism.);
The fight within Islam is between moderates and extremists. (No, the fight is between different extremist groups or schools of thought.);
We must use moderates in Islam to fight extremists. (We must use a fundamentally different approach: using science-based arguments to help liberate educated Muslims so that they are empowered to neutralize political Islamic movement from within.);
Ideology is the strong suit of Muslim radicals. (No, seen through common sense, derived from science, it is political Islam’s weak link.);
We can rely on moderate leaders in nations such as Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. (The de facto power in these nations are political Islamic movements, this makes these leaders ineffective in stopping these nations from being fountainheads of terror.);
Grievances drive Muslim populations into anger and towards terror. (No, most grievances are manufactured to channel Muslim energies towards jihad.).
Well said. An interview worth reading by everyone. Strongly recommended.
here is the link again:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=33ADCAA3-1E36-4665-881D-8E6C4F6C8D7B
Posted by: andré | 2007-11-30 4:48:10 AM
i hear white feather jack wants to send social workers and himself to talk to them. i think it would be more appropriate to name a stuffed jackass after there mystical prophet. oh im sorry am i allowed to say that in canada.
Posted by: john a. | 2007-11-30 7:44:27 PM
"am i allowed to say that in canada"
As of today. But the Leftists are working on having you re-educated soon. (See Homographic's comments on another thread.)
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-30 7:54:17 PM
liberal governmemts tried that when i was in the army, it just made us drink more beer
Posted by: john a. | 2007-11-30 8:08:50 PM
“Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.”
~ Benjamin Franklin
Posted by: obc | 2007-11-30 8:45:18 PM
This is Moorthy Muthuswamy
Data and analysis of Islamic trilogy and Islam's consequential record all these centuries and especially, its contemporary record points to an ideology that was designed for conquest (details in my book).
From this perspective coexistence is not possible; so is Muslim progress.
We have to be open to what research tells us about Islam and Muslims, and let that define both short-term and long-term policy responses.
As I have indicated in my interview, if we continue to be guided by un-objective pre-conceived notions about Islam and Muslims, we stand to face hardship and eventually, annihilation!
Posted by: Moorthy Muthuswamy | 2007-12-01 9:00:43 AM
Moorthy stands not alone in this opinion.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/08/gingrich/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
Posted by: Lady | 2007-12-01 10:40:33 AM
Gingrich is no fool.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-01 10:50:24 AM
Everything has its limits--even tolerance.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-12-01 10:57:21 AM
I was reading on the CBC website--I know, sickness, true sickness, but the article caught my attention--that the Sudanese have been calling for the death of the teacher. Apparently, when sermons were over, the people poored out onto the streets, and began to protest and make calls for her death. They were demanding she be taken out of the prison and executed by firing squad. Apparently, she has been taken to a location, and her current location has not been released.
I feel we should bar these freaks from entry into Canada. There is no reason why we should permit anyone who might house these kinds of attitudes entry. And, others who might house these sentiments, should be shown the door. And if the door smacks them on the head as they make their exit, then so-be-it!
If they want to live like that then they can go back from whence they hailed, and the sooner the better.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-12-01 4:50:53 PM
I'm afraid the door is jammed open. Sudanese are pouring into Alberta at an alarming rate. Blame the labour shortage I guess. The problem is that they don't really contribute much to the workforce. They come here expecting a free ride, and anyone who's had to deal with them will tell you they are extremely lazy. It will take several generations to turn them into productive citizens. By that time Alberta's economy will likely be ruined.
Another effect of this influx is a huge jump in crime rates in communities where they tend to congeel. The town of Brooks is now a total loss because of the huge influx from Sudan and Somolia. Bin Laden T shirts are a big favourite at the Texas owned packing plant. Though Brooks was never a great place, it used to be contained. These new immigrants are not staying put. Many of them head for Calgary and immediately get onto the Government dole.
I can't imagine anything more offensive than my tax dollars going to support a bunch of Bin Laden supporters.
Posted by: dp | 2007-12-02 8:41:29 AM
In the meantime, the feminazis remain unusually quiet. They will not come to the defence of this woman.
I guess their mission statement isn't quite what they (mis)led us to believe.
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-02 8:45:17 AM
dp - I'm afraid the door is jammed open. Sudanese are pouring into Alberta at an alarming rate.
Gee, wasn't that all supposed to change when the Conservatives came to power. I remember reading countless times Conservatives (but specifically Diane Ablonczy) ranting about the broken immigration system. Hopefully they'll do a better job fixing immigration than Prentice did with wireless spectrum allocation.
Posted by: O'REILLY | 2007-12-02 8:58:13 AM
obc - In the meantime, the feminazis remain unusually quiet. They will not come to the defence of this woman.
Nor did George Bush with the Saudi gang rape victim.
Posted by: O'REILLY | 2007-12-02 9:07:17 AM
O'Gotcha is back in form today. :)
Posted by: obc | 2007-12-02 9:45:06 AM
dp,
In two generations they will be declaring Alberta Islamic territory, and the oil fields their traditional homelands. They'll create a special political name for their new nation, like the Palestinians did. Let me see, what could that be? How about Immigratia? How about their own name, Immigratians? Makes as much sense as Palestine and Palestinians!
Posted by: Lady | 2007-12-02 10:31:58 AM
Lattest news--Apparently the teacher has been granted a full pardon, on the basis that the leader did not believe that her intent was to offend islam.
So, she can go home.
Apparently she is looking forward to going home, and upset that she will never go back to Sudan.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-12-03 11:03:43 AM
Lattest news--Apparently the teacher has been granted a full pardon, on the basis that the leader did not believe that her intent was to offend islam.
So, she can go home.
Apparently she is looking forward to going home, and upset that she will never go back to Sudan.
Posted by: Lady | 2007-12-03 11:04:19 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.