- Mom stabs 2-year old girl in head with scissors during tiff with hubby
- PKR to file Balik Pulau petition
- Police capable of handling gathering in PJ - Ahmad Zahid
- M'sian couple on Aussie rich list
- Police will appeal rejection of remand on trio, says Ahmad Zahid
- 2 coaches leave Manchester United
- Paul Low resigns as Transparency International Malaysia president
- Soccer: I got carried away with QPR, says ’naive’ Fernandes
- Opposition agreed to hold peaceful gatherings but did opposite - Zahid
- Malaysian couple joins Aussie's billionaire club
- Five dead as police helicopter crashes in Venezuela
- Giant Lego Star Wars X-Wing lands on NY's Times Square
- University lecturers to boost English in schools
- Malaysia tycoon plans IPO of football club Cardiff City
- 'Only two solutions to avert disaster' More
The New Straits Times dated 2nd May 2012 published by us contained at page 6 an article entitled “Observer Under Scrutiny” with a sub-title “Impartiality Questioned: Anti-Islam Australian Lawmaker Comes Under Fire”. The Australian Lawmaker referred to in the article is Mr Nicholas Xenophon.
This article contained, amongst others, the following statement:
1. In a speech made in the Australian Parliament on 17.11.2009, Mr Xenophon was critical of Islam and came out openly in support of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issue.
2. Mr Xenophon is reported to have said in his speech that “What we are seeing is a worldwide pattern of abuse and criminality. On the body of evidence, this is not happening by accident; it is happening by design. Islam is not a religious organisation. It is a criminal organisation that hides behind its so-called religious beliefs.”
3. Mr Xenophon therefore questioned whether Islam deserved any support.
We hereby confirm that we have made a grave error in publishing the statements in the article. We accept that in his speech in the Australian Parliament referred to in the article, Mr Xenophon did not use the word “Islam” and neither did he assert that Islam is not a religious organisation but a criminal organisation hiding behind its religious belief.
For the above reason, we hereby retract all the statements contained in the article against Mr Xenophon and unreservedly and unconditionally apologise to him for any distress or embarrassment caused by the article.
As a further mark of our contrition, we have also removed the article from our online version of the newspaper with immediate effect.