Dilution
You have to wonder sometimes, you know?
95,000 descendants of the prophet Muhammad are planning to bring a libel action in Britain over “blasphemous” cartoons of the founder of Islam, even though they were published in the Danish press. The defamation case is being prepared by Faisal Yamani, a Saudi lawyer acting for the descendants, who live in the Middle East, north Africa and as far afield as Australia.
They’re teasing us, right? They’re not serious. I mean, they’re serious about doing it, sure, but they’re not serious about the ‘descendants of the prophet Muhammad’ bit. They’re being ‘ironic,’ they’re playing to our expectations, they’re parodying their own reputation for believing silly things. Right? They don’t really think it means anything to talk about ‘descendants’ of someone who lived 14 centuries ago, right? Because they realize that over that many generations, any one ‘ancestor’ is lost in the crowd. Any 1400 years ago ‘ancestor’ is just some tiny tiny fraction of your total ancestry, so it’s just stupid to talk about being a ‘descendant.’ They know that – they’re just playing ‘dumb believer’ for the benefit of the audience, or something. They don’t really expect anybody to be impressed that they’re ‘descendants’ of Mo…
[A British lawyer] said the descendants could argue that the cartoons — which first appeared in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005, sparking violent protests around the world — were a direct slur on them. “Direct descendants of the prophet have a particular place within Muslim society…By effectively criticising and making fun of the prophet you are, by implication, holding them up to scandal, contempt and public ridicule,” he said. “So it may be that they will suffer some kind of damage among their own community.”
Well then why don’t we all get together and sue Hanna-Barbera for doing ‘The Flintstones’? That’s got to be a nice little earner.
Having dabbled (and a bit more) in genealogy, why the hell can’t we all get in on this class-action suit? Except I don’t think any of my ancestors have a right to be protected from ridicule.
For those who didn’t know yet:
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2002/05/olson.htm
In point of fact, being a “sayyid,” or descendant of Muhammad, IS a big deal in Islamic countries, especially among Shi’ites — Shi’ite clerics who are also descendants of the prophet get to wear black turbans (like Ayatollah Khomeini), since black is the color of the prophet’s family, and I believe Shi’ites also pay a certain amount of charity to the “house of the prophet”, which goes to his descendants). The kings of Morocco and Jordan both base a large part of their legitimacy on being descended from Muhammad, and it’s considered an honor to marry into a sayyid family.
I always thought they should take DNA from a large number of putative descendants of Muhammad and run tests on them to see if there’s anything similar! Of course, that’s assuming that everybody’s telling the truth about their ancestry and not just claiming it for the social status!
So would it be appropriate to refer to them with the terminology Dawkins uses in The Ancestors Tale? The prophet is my 687th great granddaddy?
What’s the point of lawsuit that has no chance of success? It will only expose them to well deserved ridicule.
Hallo GD – you have access back then?
Yep OB, I’m back. Thanks for the suggestions. They didn’t quite get me fixed, but they did give enough additional clues to finally get things working again.
I knew they wouldn’t get you fixed, just a stop-gap in the meantime. Anyway glad yer back.
The Flintstones isn’t enough of a cash cow anymore.
We should sue Nickelodeon for ‘Spongebob Squarepants’ – he besmirches our common ancestor.
The descendents of the prophet should hit the Danes where it hurts. Why don’t they make a cartoon about a lazy, fat, hard-drinking Viking? They could call him Hagar. Those Danes will soon see how hurtful cartoons about one’s ancestors can be.
My ancestors 6000 years ago, Adam and Eve, were also Mohammed’s ancestors. Therefore he’s my relation too, and the people of Denmark have gratuitously insulted me. I want my slice of the action too.
I wonder if, by making this a “descendants’ rights” issue, they aren’t thereby also weakening any potential rights of the “mere” adherents, i.e. Muslims who don’t claim Mo as a direct ancestor. Of course, there’s no limit to how far you could take this. You could claim that everyone is your distant cousin and wind up trying to protect them, leading to something ghastly like Amnesty International. Just as long as you didn’t neglect preferential treatment for your less distant cousins.
“Libel Tourism”
Jack Straw was just on the “Today” programme (at about 08.15hrs ….)
Stating that a committe has made recommendations, which will be published later today, to put an end to this nonsense.
He specifically mentioned the science cases (without naming S. Singh) and foreign journals.
It looks as though, whoever wins the election, that FINALLY something useful will come of this.
Watch the news channels for fresh information on this one.
Maybe. What I can tell you, is that if I heard Mormons talking seriously about descendants of someone who lived 14 centuries ago, I would know they were not teasing. I was raised Mormon; I grew up surrounded by people who believed, devoutly, that they had a solemn duty to perform or see performed Mormon religious rites for every ancestor whose name they could discover – including ancestors from over a 1000 years ago, for those who could find ancestors that far back. (The difference of course, is that Prophet Joeseph Smith Jr. is the only person Mormons revere as much as Muslims revere Mohammed, and he lived more recently – so an equivalent situation couldn’t occur.)
Hm. I had read that Yamani was making up the number of descendants, and that it was only he and his father bringing the complaint. I wish I could source it, though. It was a week or so ago when I saw that.
Here’s a source, but it’s not where I read it originally (unfortunately they don’t show their work re:the arab board message):
http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2010/03/denmark-politiken-staff-rejects-prophet.html
In August 2009 Yamani lied about this in his letter to 16 Danish editors, reports B.T.
The lawyer wrote that he’s working for thousands of Mohmmad’s descendants, who feel insulted by the papers reprinting the cartoons, and that they asked him to turn to the papers and ask for an apology.
As it turns out, Faisal Yamani and his wealthy father Zaki Yamani, took the initiative on their own. In April 2008 they wrote on an Arab chat-forum that they will sue for themselves, so that the editors will be punished.
They also said that the lawsuit will force the Danish government to officially apologize for the cartoons, and that interested Muslims who can show their descendants of Muhammad should send a power of attorney if they support the lawsuit.
Update.
Straw has made a Commons announcement, and details/comments are available here and also here
The BAD news is that this a Labour government proposal, for implementation after the election.
What any incoming government will do is anyone’s guess, and we will have to wait, whilst this insanity continues ….