Here are some beautiful photos of Al Ain that I stumbled across that you might want to see:
Road atop Jabal Hafeet
Young camel at the Camel Souk
"The Abandoned Traditions" (my personal favorite - I'm fairly certain that this is the museum that was formerly Sheikh Zayed's house).
Oh, but don't bother trying to see them if you are behind the proxy, since they are all on Flickr.
[update]
SD has provided links in the comments so that everyone can enjoy them.
This blog began as a description of our life in Al Ain, UAE (United Arab Emirates). Brn worked at the UAE University Libraries Deanship for three years and Bss homeschooled our four children, D, B, P, and O. After returning to the the USA for five years, we are living in Abu Dhabi now.
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
2007/07/15
2007/07/14
Don't Crossed this Invisible Line
I never seem to know where the line is about what is ok and what is not. Compare and contrast:
Not OK:
A "game [that] consists of cards that contain devilish phrases, sketches and shameful pictures". (I'm guessing that the game is Vampire: The Eternal Struggle, but only because Googling "Struggle Card" doesn't yield much else.)
OK:
The movie "Hell Boy", which I bought at Carrefour last year (one word review: meh). It is slap full of occult images and phrases. Also OK, "Ghost Rider", in which Nicholas Cage plays the devil's bounty hunter. This film was just being shown a few weeks ago in theaters here.
Not OK:
Any depiction of Muhammad.
OK:
Mogan Freeman, playing God on screen, in Evan Almighty (scheduled to open 2 August).
Not OK:
Michelle Malkin's blog, blocked by the UAE proxy server.
OK:
Little Green Footballs, a website that has been frequently been charged with being anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. It is not blocked by the proxy.
Leave aside any arguments for the rightness or wrongness of any of these decisions, because that is not my point. I'm only saying that it has to be hard for people like the owner of the shop in that first story to know absolutely if these cards are OK or not.
Not OK:
A "game [that] consists of cards that contain devilish phrases, sketches and shameful pictures". (I'm guessing that the game is Vampire: The Eternal Struggle, but only because Googling "Struggle Card" doesn't yield much else.)
OK:
The movie "Hell Boy", which I bought at Carrefour last year (one word review: meh). It is slap full of occult images and phrases. Also OK, "Ghost Rider", in which Nicholas Cage plays the devil's bounty hunter. This film was just being shown a few weeks ago in theaters here.
Not OK:
Any depiction of Muhammad.
OK:
Mogan Freeman, playing God on screen, in Evan Almighty (scheduled to open 2 August).
Not OK:
Michelle Malkin's blog, blocked by the UAE proxy server.
OK:
Little Green Footballs, a website that has been frequently been charged with being anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. It is not blocked by the proxy.
Leave aside any arguments for the rightness or wrongness of any of these decisions, because that is not my point. I'm only saying that it has to be hard for people like the owner of the shop in that first story to know absolutely if these cards are OK or not.
2007/07/13
Getting traffic is that easy?
According to Secret Dubai at 'Aquol, "sex is the most common search referrer by a mile". So all I have to do is mention sex, maybe even put it as a tag, and people searching for sex will find this blog? Can it be that easy?
Be sure to sign the petition that asks the TRA to unblock Sex and Dubai.
Be sure to sign the petition that asks the TRA to unblock Sex and Dubai.
2007/05/02
No kissing for you!
I have written before about how strange some of the decisions about what gets censored and what doesn't on TV here can be. That post was about the profanity that does and doesn't get broadcast, but the other big thing that gets cut from many channels is not just sex, but kissing. Tonight I saw the funniest example of this yet.
We bought a VHS tape of Chicken Run when we were still in the US and the kids watched it so much that we all pretty much have the movie memorized. We left the tape at home, so I haven't seen it in a couple of years. Tonight I came across it on MBC3 and decided to watch it.
If you haven't seen it, the movie is an Ardman (the same people who make Wallace and Grommet) movie, so everything is done with claymation. There is a scene near the end where the main male chicken character pulls the main female chicken character onto the plane and there is what seems like an obvious build up to a kiss. Instead, she hits him (for leaving), and then she kisses him, though it is shown from behind, so all you see is the back of a claymation chicken head.
Well, in the MBC3 version, he pulls her onto the plane and boom, in a really awkward jump, then we are on to the next scene. I really do try to be open minded and understanding of different cultures, but I can't really see the threat from showing the back of a cartoon chicken head that is being kissed by another cartoon chicken. It did give me a good laugh though.
We bought a VHS tape of Chicken Run when we were still in the US and the kids watched it so much that we all pretty much have the movie memorized. We left the tape at home, so I haven't seen it in a couple of years. Tonight I came across it on MBC3 and decided to watch it.
If you haven't seen it, the movie is an Ardman (the same people who make Wallace and Grommet) movie, so everything is done with claymation. There is a scene near the end where the main male chicken character pulls the main female chicken character onto the plane and there is what seems like an obvious build up to a kiss. Instead, she hits him (for leaving), and then she kisses him, though it is shown from behind, so all you see is the back of a claymation chicken head.
Well, in the MBC3 version, he pulls her onto the plane and boom, in a really awkward jump, then we are on to the next scene. I really do try to be open minded and understanding of different cultures, but I can't really see the threat from showing the back of a cartoon chicken head that is being kissed by another cartoon chicken. It did give me a good laugh though.
2007/02/03
What a Difference the Next Day Makes
So I noted last week that Emirates Today seems to be taking a pro-censorship stance at nearly the same time that the Gulf News was reporting a "victory for freedom of expression and press".
On Thursday, the Gulf News seems to be shooting back with the editorial "The present-day predicament of Arabs". In it, Munir Daair argues that "The most significant contributor to ... [the] lack of self sufficiency and meaningful progress in Arabia is the absence of freedom of thought and expression."
I don't know enough to know if that is true or not. It seems plausible, but then I am also in danger of confirmation bias here. I'll let you read his words and decide for yourself. I do know that in the US we view freedom of expression as a strength, a benefit that makes our society stronger.
On Thursday, the Gulf News seems to be shooting back with the editorial "The present-day predicament of Arabs". In it, Munir Daair argues that "The most significant contributor to ... [the] lack of self sufficiency and meaningful progress in Arabia is the absence of freedom of thought and expression."
I don't know enough to know if that is true or not. It seems plausible, but then I am also in danger of confirmation bias here. I'll let you read his words and decide for yourself. I do know that in the US we view freedom of expression as a strength, a benefit that makes our society stronger.
2007/01/31
What a difference a day makes
Yesterday's Gulf News:
Today's Emirates Today (page one, page two, page three) all but begs the government to ban Dante, Marlowe, Cervantes, and Shakespeare.
Look, I understand that this is officially a Muslim country. I appreciate that, as much as can be, Christianity is protected and not allowed to be insulted here. I can understand why a book like "The Force of Reason" would be banned here. But there is something really strange about a newspaper arguing for censorship, especially when any increase in censorship will only make their own job more difficult.
Banning works by Dante and Shakespeare is giving a gift to the extremist enemies of Islam in the West. It will allow them to make the Emirates seem like a backward and intolerant place, instead of the way that it really is.
A defamation case against two Emirati journalists, including Gulf News reporter, was thrown out by Al Ain Court of Appeals...
Mohammad Yousuf, Chairman of the UAE Journalists Association, said the ruling is yet another victory for freedom of expression and press...
Today's Emirates Today (page one, page two, page three) all but begs the government to ban Dante, Marlowe, Cervantes, and Shakespeare.
Look, I understand that this is officially a Muslim country. I appreciate that, as much as can be, Christianity is protected and not allowed to be insulted here. I can understand why a book like "The Force of Reason" would be banned here. But there is something really strange about a newspaper arguing for censorship, especially when any increase in censorship will only make their own job more difficult.
Banning works by Dante and Shakespeare is giving a gift to the extremist enemies of Islam in the West. It will allow them to make the Emirates seem like a backward and intolerant place, instead of the way that it really is.
2005/07/23
Press Law
Dubai Truth has posted the Press Law on his/her blog, Dubai Daze, so you can read all about what can and can't be written here in the UAE. Some examples are:
* No criticism shall be made against the Head of State or Rulers of the Emirates
* Any work is absolutely prohibited from being published if it involves instigation against Islam or the system of ruling
* No opinions shall be published if they violate public discipline and order, or involve insult to teenagers, or call for or circulate subversive ideas. [wait, teenagers? I can't even insult teenagers?]
* No article blemishing the president of an Arab, Islamic or any other friendly state will be published. It is also prohibited to publish any material that causes agitation to relations between the UAE and other Arab, Islamic and friendly countries.
* No article defaming Arabs and their civilisation and heritage shall be published.
As I read this, I remembered a story about Fredrick the Great. Someone once came to the emperor and said that a man was insulting the Prussian army. He then asked Fredrick what should be done about him. Fredrick replied, "Leave that man alone. He is biting on granite."
* No criticism shall be made against the Head of State or Rulers of the Emirates
* Any work is absolutely prohibited from being published if it involves instigation against Islam or the system of ruling
* No opinions shall be published if they violate public discipline and order, or involve insult to teenagers, or call for or circulate subversive ideas. [wait, teenagers? I can't even insult teenagers?]
* No article blemishing the president of an Arab, Islamic or any other friendly state will be published. It is also prohibited to publish any material that causes agitation to relations between the UAE and other Arab, Islamic and friendly countries.
* No article defaming Arabs and their civilisation and heritage shall be published.
As I read this, I remembered a story about Fredrick the Great. Someone once came to the emperor and said that a man was insulting the Prussian army. He then asked Fredrick what should be done about him. Fredrick replied, "Leave that man alone. He is biting on granite."
Censoring Profanity on TV
I had been warned before I came that a lot of things are censored here, so I haven't been shocked by anything that has been cut out of things for the most part. But the other night I was watching Independence Day on the TV here (I hope that Ben and Henry can forgive me), and I noticed something strange: they let a lot of words go out that in America would have been bleeped (e.g a**hole), but then they muted "son of a bitch". I understand that different cultures have different standards of what is a profanity (for example, in America 'fanny' is a fairly polite term for a butt, but not in England, where it means something else), and that Arabs in general dislike dogs (because they are unclean). But still, this struck me as really strange.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)