It’s good to see Mishima getting some attention — even if it is only through Glass’s music for the movie. I often complain about this, but I’m going to make it again: the problem with much art, dance, theater, and so on, is that it ends up as a kind of psychotherapy session, rather than telling us anything about the alleged subject. According to the USC, “Pickett says she leaves it to the audience to decipher their own meanings for the piece and its title.” But, why not tell us something concrete? Interpretation means, inevitably, we see things from our own (prior) understanding.

Born January 14, 1925, Mishima was both a sickly child and a literary genius. He produced numerous acclaimed novels and books of short stories, as well as plays for the Noh theater. He also acted and conducted an orchestra. Most interestingly, perhaps, while Mishima was fervently nationalistic, he was also cosmopolitan, and loved Greek culture — which profoundly influenced his writing — and Western culture more broadly. In the last few years of his life Mishima founded his own private army, the Shield Society, for students who could not participate in the vibrant Marxist movements that then existed on campus. He committed hara-kiri (suicide) by cutting his stomach open, in the traditional Japanese style, in November 1970.

“I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don’t understand about you. I will not pray for you.” 

Kashgari was en route to New Zealand when he was detained by Malaysian authorities at the request of Interpol because of the tweet. He was then deported to Saudi Arabia, where he was arrested for blasphemy.

Saudi clerics have declared the 23 year-old to be an apostate, and, as Charles Santiago, DAP’s MP for Klang, notes in Free Malaysia Today, “13,000 people have joined a Facebook page titled ‘The Saudi People Demand the Execution of Hamza Kashgari’.”

Regarding the deportation of Kashgari, Santiago says that,

“There is no extradition treaty between Malaysia and Saudi Arabia. Hence there was no necessity to quickly hand Kashgari over to the people who are calling for his head.”

“The deportation is unlawful as Kashgari’s lawyer, Muhammad Afiq Mohamad Nor, had obtained a court order to block the deportation.”

“with complete disregard for human rights,” Santiago says, Malaysia “sent a young man to face possible death in his home country.” For a Tweet.

A young Muslim fashion designer wearing hijab.

A couple of decades ago a model agency for aristocrats was launched in Great Britain. It didn’t last long, as I recall. The founder seemed to have overlooked the obvious fact that people hire models based on their looks, not whether they can trace their family tree to King Henry VIII. But it was a good gimmick, and it made the press. Getting a lot less attention is Underwraps, a model agency for Muslims, launched recently in New York City.

The founder of Underwraps, Nailah Lymus, describes herself as a “self-taught designer,” and says she has been “a clothing and accessory designer since 2004.” Lymus showed her collection at NY fashion week in 2011.

Perhaps more curious than this pretty straight forward fashion resume, Lymus describes her two passions as “modesty and fashion.” The two don’t often go together, although perhaps a little more mixing of the two would be no bad thing.

Modeling is a pretty brutal world, really. Controversy swirls around the female models, many of which are simply too thin, and some of whom appear, quite frankly, malnourished. Models are pressured into being something that no woman can really be for very long without experiencing considerable psychological or physical stresses and strains. For this reason, model agencies are also using younger models. Take a good look at many catwalk shows, and it’s pretty clear that some are only 15 or so years-old. Personally, I think that’s too young.

The fashion industry needs to clean its act up.

Lymus, who’s an American-born Muslim herself, told Fashionista that “[Muslim models] come from a background where they dress Islamically appropriate, but to be in this industry and to be a model you kind of have to forfeit that. That’s why I wanted to start this agency, so you don’t have to do that. You don’t have to lose who you are to be in this business.”

A lot of young models undoubtedly do lose who they are. Supporting models in this regard is a positive step. But Lymus might be better off taking an ethical approach to modeling — one that accords with her understanding of Islam –rather than having a Muslim model agency per se. Perhaps this would mean refusing to allow her models to do naked or semi-naked shots, and ensuring that they diet properly (i.e. do not starve themselves), and are seen as people, not just glorified clothes hangers.

After all, anyone — even the most daring model — can wear modest clothes, including headscarves. Why would one’s religion be a factor? I suspect that a model agency for Muslims is fated to head the same way as one for aristocrats, or one that might in the future be set up for Christians or atheists. And why the segregation? Unless the agency will work only for Muslim designers? Is it even legal, or does it run contrary to America’s anti-discrimination laws? I’m not sure.

But, again, if young Muslim women want to figure out how fashion and Islam, and beauty and modesty, go together, I’m all for it. Whatever happens, Underwraps might get people thinking.

Perhaps it should be said that neoconservatism has been largely defined by people that did not necessarily consider themselves neocons, or, rather, by people who accused enough of their opponents of being neocons for it to appear a coherent movement. In fact, it was a motley kinda crew, and one could imagine drinking far too late into the night with some of them. That’s no bad thing. The leaderships of the ancient Germanic tribes used to drink together when debating politics, war, and so on. The point was to get people to say what they really thought. Decisions were made when everyone had sobered up.

Today, I wish I could buy a few drinks for a number of “neoconservative” spokespeople. I find myself concerned by the thinking in lockstep that seems so apparent. On a host of issues, we appear to hear only the same thing being said over and again, with little attempt to imagine ways of improving things. More especially, angry and indignant calls to bomb Iran seem to be a virtually daily occurrence. The argument is simple, and alarming: If Iran gets the bomb, the argument goes, Iran will nuke Israel.

Tehran’s appalling treatment of its own people — especially its democratic dissidents — is dragged in to the argument nonetheless. Yet, contrary to what is implied, although the Iranian people are pro-American, and vehemently opposed to the Iranian regime, they also overwhelming believe that nuclear weapons is their right. This includes the pro-democracy activists, who, like everyone else in the country, live in a volatile region. Iran fought an eight-year-long war with Iraq, let’s not forget.

Some things to think about, then:

If the US bombs Iran its pro-Western populace will be suddenly one hundred percent behind the Iranian regime, and one hundred percent against the West. Iran is also the spiritual home of the Shiite majority in Iraq, and enjoys an excellent relationship with its Iraqi brethren, not least of all those in Government. As the US withdraws from Iraq, we might well find it suddenly in alliance with Iran. Muslims across the globe will see it as more proof of a conspiracy against Islam (from the great and little Satan). At the very least, the Middle East would radicalize even more, and the US would have virtually no friends left.

Although strikes against Iran would be — it is implied — “surgical,” it is certain that Iran would retaliate in a variety of ways, including terrorism against Israel, and against the US. The price of oil would go sky high, making the economic situation of Western nations much worse, and driving unemployment higher. Large scale panic might well ensue. The American public will be as angry at the current administration as it was with the former President.

Neither the invasions of Afghanistan or Iraq, nor the invasion of Libya went as planned. They have had unseen consequences of the most extraordinary magnitude, ushering in the exact opposite of what was desired. Islamists have come to prominence in Libya. Al-Qaeda established itself in Iraq after the invasion. And, with Saddam Hussein (a thoroughly evil figure, to be sure) gone, Iran was transformed into the major player that we are now so concerned about.

Iran also enjoys a good relationship with Russia, and India — the world’s largest democracy — is also keen to secure as much Iranian oil as possible. They would not be pleased by a US strike.

I suspect it won’t, but if the US does strike Iran to stop a strike on Israel, it will set in stone the mindset that believes the US and the “Zionist entity” are an imperialist alliance that keep the little nations of the world down. A few Saudi princes may feel relieved — privately — but it won’t win hearts and minds.

Do you remember when one episode of the British comedy Absolutely Fabulous took Patsy and Edina to Morocco? For the two drunken, self-absorbed anti-heroes Morocco was all about smoking “Mary Jane” (to use a Sixties slang term) and buying “gorgeous thing.”

It seems a little one sided, but perhaps this wasn’t an entirely illusory side of the “Islamic world.” It hasn’t always been burkas and morality police, you know. Iran and Egypt were, only a few decades ago, modern-ish, Western-style nations.

From Hussein Chalayan's 1996 fashion show

Fun wasn’t a dirty word back then. Look at a photo of an Egyptian class of 1970 and, although you’ll see plenty of female graduates, you won’t see any hijabs.

But is there anything wrong with the hijab? For many Muslims and non-Muslims it’s a symbol of the Muslim Brotherhood, which for non Muslims means it’s a symbol of extremism. But there’s another side to it, I think we should acknowledge.

Irreverent: Patsy and Edina of Ab Fab.

Perhaps the battle of the hijab, and the identity of the Muslim woman, really began in England. It’s been forgotten, but in those halcyon days of pre-9/11 and pre-7/7, and all the other dates we’d rather forget, Turkish-English fashion designer Hussein Chalayan sent models down the catwalk wearing burkas made into slit skirts. Some of the models were naked from the waist down. One was entirely naked except for the gold mask traditionally worn with Saudi Arabian burqas. (Apparently it’s meant to imitate the look of a falcon.) No fatwas, no embassies burned. Although no doubt some people were “offended” it was just a fashion show.

Well, it was politics, too — in a round about way.

Hijab and jeans. Is this a statement against the West, or applauding it?

In the Moroccan Ab Fab episode it’s revealed that Patsy used to be a man. We learn that she was a transexual briefly. It pushes the limits but it’s all a bit of a laugh. When Burak Birer, 31, saw transexuals in a fashion magazine he had a different reaction. He founded Ala, a hijab fashion magazine, in Istanbul to contest the “diktat of nudity,” the Daily Mail reports.

It’s already selling like hot cakes — halal ones of course — with circulation at 30,000. About 1,500 are shipped to Germany.

Ala is a Turkish word meaning the most beautiful. Birer says with “Cosmopolitan, Elle, Vogue, Marie Claire, it’s all about sex and naked skin. ‘The motto is that sex sells. But we, and millions of women around the world, believe that fashion can also be different.”

Don’t be so surprised; there are a few hijab high fashion blogs — such as Hijab Fashion, Hijab Trendz (note the cool intentional misspelling), and Hijab Style —  that show an entirely different side of the Muslim headscarf.

I’ve seen young Muslim women wearing Western clothing with the hijab. I’m sure if you live in a modern Western city you have too. There seems to be two conflicting messages here: (1) I’m modern, Western, and cool, just like you, and (2) I’m not like you. The latter message is one that goes with fashion, whether we like it or not — think Punk, Skin, or any other confrontation trend.

There are different ways to be modern. For some people — such as are parodied in Ab Fab — it’s about accepting all that comes along; the more outrageous the better. At the other extreme there are those that want technology within an essentially medieval world.

The hijab may not represent either extreme. It might in some cases represent political inclinations, not entirely unlike the Che tee-shirt. In other cases it might signal an attempt to incorporate traditional — but not medieval — values in a modern lifestyle.

Regardless, it’s no bad thing that young Muslim women are thinking about Islam in regard to beauty.

Frankly, it’s time the authorities shut Anonymous down.

Perhaps it started innocently enough, with people protesting Scientology while wearing the Guy Fawkes mask as seen in the movie V for Vendetta.

A loose network of “hactivists,” Anonymous has supported Wikileaks and democracy protests in the Middle East. But it’s also attempted to hack Facebook — and promises to achieve that goal this year, and to steal account information along with it. And, it also recently hacked the security info site, Stratfor, stealing bank account numbers and cash from those accounts, which it then gave to charities, we’re told.

As European Son reported in November 2011, one Anonymous group also attacked Muslim Brotherhood websites. Anti-MB types might applaud, but the Anonymous hactivists also accused the MB of copying Freemasonry. Whenever you hear “Freemasonry” mentioned in Islamic or Middle Eastern circles you know that the speakers have absorbed the “Zionist Masonic” conspiracy theory of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Tsarist forgery that blamed the Jews for creating chaos in the world, and claimed that they were working to create a world Zionist state. How’d it get to the Middle East, you wonder? Through the propaganda efforts of the Nazis. The forgery is still frequently cited in the Arab/Muslim press today.

The anti-MB Anonymous activists also expressed support for the movement’s early goals — when it was funded by the Nazis, incidentally.

No, I’m not saying that Anonymous are Nazis. Like the British anti-Islamist English Defence League, anyone can self-identify as a member of the network. There is no formal application procedure or dues cards for either group. That means anyone can claim to represent the network. Anonymous seems to be a very mixed bag — kids, do-gooders, pro-democracy activists, liberals, plus a few Islamists, anti-democracy activists, cyber thugs and criminals as well.

The network officially uses very threatening sounding slogans, most famously “we do not forgive… expect us.”

According to the Daily Mail, Anonymous is spamming people on Twitter. Click on a link from a friend and you might just have become ”part of Anonymous’s recent ‘Operation Megaupload’ — a retaliation for the U.S. government ‘taking down’ a file-sharing site.

‘This change in tactic from Anonymous, which allows attacks to be launched by simply clicking on a link, means that internet users need to be extremely careful when clicking on unknown URLs or they could unwittingly be joining this latest zombie army.”

“Don’t forget, denial-of-service-attacks are illegal,” says Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at Sophos.

“If you participate in such an attack, you could find yourself receiving a lengthy jail sentence.”

“I’m not sure if participants in this instance would get away with claiming that they innocently clicked on links by mistake, so make sure you always trust the links you click on, even if they’re shared by a friend on social networking sites.”

The image for the reverse of the 50 Euro coin is taken from Klimt’s celebrated 1907 Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I, and was engraved by Herbert Waehner. The coin shows the head and part of the shoulders of Bloch-Bauer I, as well as the swirling decoration for which Klimt became so well known. The portrait of the Viennese socialite was purchased by the Neue Galerie in New York City in 2006, and is currently on show there. According to the New York Times the painting sold for a cool $135 million.

On the obverse of the coin, engraved by Thomas Pesendorfer, is a portrait of Klimt based on a photograph by Moriz Naehr (circa 1917 – 18) framed in a square. The coin also shows Klimt’s signature and the words “Republik Oesterreich” as well as the value, 50 Euros, and year of issue, 2012.

According to CoinUpdate.com, the first in the Klimt series will be issued in January 2012, and will run through to 2016.

(Photo copyright FreeTibet.org.)

Free Tibet, the British-based Tibetan rights organization, has reported that two Tibetan nationals self immolated in Ngaba Town on January 6, 2012. An eye witness to one of the acts of self-immolation said that a layperson set him or herself on fire near Kirti Monastery in Ngaba Town at around 2:50pm (local time). A second person, a Buddhist monk, reportedly died at the scene.

In a press release Free Tibet Director Stephanie Brigden said:

“These latest self-immolations confirm that what we are currently witnessing in Tibet is a sustained and profound rejection of the Chinese occupation. It is a damning indictment of the international community that 14 people, in different parts of Tibet, have now chosen to set themselves on fire and the international community has failed to respond.

“We can only expect that such acts of protest will continue for as long as world leaders turn a blind eye to the desperate situation in Tibet.

“People in Ngaba continue to live under security restrictions. Chinese authorities are trying to control all communications. There has been no internet access in the town since the first self-immolation in March 2011 [2] and local people are fearful that their telephones are bugged.

“Despite this, many brave Tibetans continue to disseminate information about what is happening at great personal risk; while the UK government remains silent.

As you might imagine, Taake (which means “Fog” in Norwegian) isn’t worried about offending people. The lyrics of the Noregs Vaapen song Okan (“Hurricane”) attacks Christianity. That’s par for the course. But the same song also also attacks Islam as a barbaric culture. Enter the “offended.”

“To hell with Muhammad and the Mohammedans” sings  Hoest, lead vocalist on Orkan. Hoest (who was previously the vocalist for Ragnarok) also refers to what he calls Islam’s “unforgivable customs,” and declares that “Norway will soon awaken”.

Aftenposten has reported that it received complaints from some members of the public who suggested the album was “violent and anti-Muslim.”

Hoest has responded in writing, saying

“Since the begining Black Metal has always been anti-religious, and nearly all [of its] bands have denigrated both religions [themselves] and the religious. This includes several former winners and nominees in the Grammy category Metals, often in far stronger terms than Taake. We consider it very unfair that just Taake texts tried to be interpreted as the right wing.”

“Our [expressed] view, in the name of freedom of expression, is that it is shameful to adhere to Christianity or Islam.” He notes that “Christianity is mentioned otherwise in the same texts, but this does not seem to be emphasized.” He also says that “Taake has never been a political band, and we do not encourage either violence or racism.”

Black Metal is known for its harsh and sometime symphonic sound, and might be thought of as Wagnerian. Its bands often draw on mythology — especially Norse mythology — and are often neo-pagan and opposed to monotheistic religions.

You can order your copy of the Spellemann-nominated album here.

Porn and religious fundamentalism just don’t mix. Or do they? Well, it appears so.

Take the case of Aliaa Magda al-Mahdy, 20. In protest against Egypt’s illiberalism and religious fundamentalism, in December, she and a male friend posted nude photos of themselves on their blogs. The Muslim-majority state exploded with shock, furor, debate, and assertions of medieval values.

Aliaa continued her protest against the oppression that she, and millions of women in the state experience on a daily basis. The twenty-year old blogger called for women to remove the hijab for freedom, and to send her two photographs to post on her blog, one veiled and one unveiled.

Enter the pious, the moral, and the self-righteous.

Aliaa has been threatened several times with rape and death for her self-expression, challenging Egypt’s oppressive conventions. But, as Rime Naquib points in the Egyptian Independent “what some described as the ‘pornographic’ nature of Aliaa’s photo is not what was most shocking about it [to Egyptians].”

Most of us probably imagined that the USA — internet savvy, modern, open about sex and nudity, and with 300 million citizens — would probably come top in terms of the number of web searches for “sex.” Guess what? Naquib points out “According to the latest ‘Google trends’ statistics, Egypt[with only 80 million people]  ranks fourth worldwide in the highest web search requests for the word ‘sex.’ “ After Pakistan, Viet Nam, and India.

“Obviously,” says Naquib, ”it is not Aliaa’s nudity — accessible only by willfully requesting her website and acknowledging Google’s warning message —that threatened the fundamentals of religion, morality and patriotism. It is Aliaa’s deliberate identity revelation, her willingness to endure the consequences of breaking the rules, and her lack of shame vis-à-vis her naked body that disturbed many. It is her espousal of the most abstracted symbol of freedom: ‘I undress. I am not afraid of you. I am not ashamed of my body.’ After all, if you do not appreciate this act as being a challenge to double standards in social norms and practices, you can just pretend you did not see it.”

Naquib is 100 percent correct that Egypt — number four in the world’s web search chart for “sex” — is shocked and disturbed by “Aliaa’s deliberate identity revelation.” Or, to put it another way, what bothers fundamentalists everywhere is that Aliaa appears to be a person, with ideas, thoughts, beliefs and feelings of her own, not merely an object that can be told what to do.